Cited by 370SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies

Human neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 require intact Fc effector functions for optimal therapeutic protection

Open access
Winkler, Emma S., Gilchuk, Pavlo, Yu, Jinsheng, Bailey, Adam L., Chen, Rita E., Chong, Zhenlu, Zost, Seth J., Jang, Hyesun +12 more·2021·Cell

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

SARS-CoV-2 has caused the global COVID-19 pandemic. Although passively delivered neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 show promise in clinical trials, their mechanism of action in vivo is incompletely understood. Here, we define correlates of protection of neutralizing human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in SARS-CoV-2-infected animals. Whereas Fc effector functions are dispensable when representative neutralizing mAbs are administered as prophylaxis, they are required for optimal protection as therapy. When given after infection, intact mAbs reduce SARS-CoV-2 burden and lung disease in mice and hamsters better than loss-of-function Fc variant mAbs. Fc engagement of neutralizing antibodies mitigates inflammation and improves respiratory mechanics, and transcriptional profiling suggests these phenotypes are associated with diminished innate immune signaling and preserved tissue repair. Immune cell depletions establish that neutralizing mAbs require monocytes and CD8+ T cells for optimal clinical and virological benefit. Thus, potently neutralizing mAbs utilize Fc effector functions during therapy to mitigate lung infection and disease.

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 · 10.1016/j.cell.2021.02.026

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Residual non-neutralizing antibodies after infection may provide some protection during reinfection even when serum neutralizing activity is below the protective threshold.

    “Thus, residual SARS-CoV-2-specific non-neutralizing antibodies following infection may confer some protective benefit during reinfection, even when serum neutralizing activity has declined below the threshold of protection25–27.”
  • Neutralization measurement does not account for Fc effector functions; Fcγ receptor or complement engagement by antibodies could confer protection.

    “this measurement does not account for Fc effector functions; Fcγ receptor or complement protein engagement by non-, weakly-, or strongly- neutralizing antibodies that bind the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein on the surface of infected cells could confer substantial protection39–41.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 101 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Winkler, E. S., Gilchuk, P., Yu, J., Bailey, A. L., Chen, R. E., Chong, Z., Zost, S. J., Jang, H., Huang, Y., Allen, J. D., Case, J. B., Sutton, R. E., Carnahan, R. H., Darling, T. L., Boon, A. C. M., Mack, M., Head, R. D., Ross, T. M., Crowe, J. E., & Diamond, M. S.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
  • University of Georgia (US)
  • University Hospital Regensburg (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Crowe, James E.
  • Diamond, Michael S.
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-04
Volume
184
Issue
7
Pages
1804-1820.e16
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3132982761
Cited by
366
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 109 · 2020: 2
FWCI
25.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion)
  • University of Regensburg Publication Server (University of Regensburg) (submittedVersion)
Funders
NIAID
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, neutralizing monoclonal antibodies, Fc effector functions, passive immunotherapy, COVID-19 pandemic, pulmonary infection, monocytes, CD8+ T cells, innate immune signaling, tissue repair, inflammation, correlates of protection

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