Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 474

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 112 of the 112 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evolution of the SARS‐CoV‐2 omicron variants BA.1 to BA.5: Implications for immune escape and transmission

Open access
Shrestha, Lok Bahadur, Foster, Charles, Rawlinson, William, Tedla, Nicodemus, Bull, Rowena A.·2022·Reviews in Medical Virology

Abstract

The first dominant SARS‐CoV‐2 Omicron variant BA.1 harbours 35 mutations in its Spike protein from the original SARS‐CoV‐2 variant that emerged late 2019. Soon after its discovery, BA.1 rapidly emerged to become the dominant variant worldwide and has since evolved into several variants. Omicron is of major public health concern owing to its high infectivity and antibody evasion. This review article examines the theories that have been proposed on the evolution of Omicron including zoonotic spillage, infection in immunocompromised individuals and cryptic spread in the community without being diagnosed. Added to the complexity of Omicron's evolution are the multiple reports of recombination events occurring between co‐circulating variants of Omicron with Delta and other variants such as XE. Current literature suggests that the combination of the novel mutations in Omicron has resulted in the variant having higher infectivity than the original Wuhan‐Hu‐1 and Delta variant. However, severity is believed to be less owing to the reduced syncytia formation and lower multiplication in the human lung tissue. Perhaps most challenging is that several studies indicate that the efficacy of the available vaccines have been reduced against Omicron variant (8–127 times reduction) as compared to the Wuhan‐Hu‐1 variant. The administration of booster vaccine, however, compensates with the reduction and improves the efficacy by 12–35 fold. Concerningly though, the broadly neutralising monoclonal antibodies, including those approved by FDA for therapeutic use against previous SARS‐CoV‐2 variants, are mostly ineffective against Omicron with the exception of Sotrovimab and recent reports suggest that the Omicron BA.2 is also resistant to Sotrovimab. Currently two new Omicron variants BA.4 and BA.5 are emerging and are reported to be more transmissible and resistant to immunity generated by previous variants including Omicron BA.1 and most monoclonal antibodies. As new variants of SARS‐CoV‐2 will likely continue to emerge it is important that the evolution, and biological consequences of new mutations, in existing variants be well understood.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/rmv.2381

Cites

112 of 112 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 112 references

Cited by

See all 474

Metadata

Authors
Shrestha, L. B., Foster, C., Rawlinson, W., Tedla, N., & Bull, R. A.
Venue
Reviews in Medical Virology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-07-20
Volume
32
Issue
5
Pages
e2381-e2381
ISSN
  • 1052-9276 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1654
OpenAlex
W4285993171
Cited by
474
References
112
FWCI
50.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evolution of the SARS‐CoV‐2 omicron variants BA.1 to BA.5: Implications for immune escape and transmission. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/rmv.2381
The paper
Shrestha, L. B., Foster, C., Rawlinson, W., Tedla, N., & Bull, R. A. (2022). Evolution of the SARS‐CoV‐2 omicron variants BA.1 to BA.5: Implications for immune escape and transmission. Reviews in Medical Virology. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2381

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.