Cited by 413SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesCOVID-19 epidemiological studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant shows less efficient replication and fusion activity when compared with Delta variant in TMPRSS2-expressed cells

Open access

Abstract

The novel SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529), first found in early November 2021, has sparked considerable global concern and it has >50 mutations, many of which are known to affect transmissibility or cause immune escape. In this study, we sought to investigate the virological characteristics of the Omicron variant and compared it with the Delta variant which has dominated the world since mid-2021. Omicron variant replicated more slowly than the Delta variant in transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2)-overexpressing VeroE6 (VeroE6/TMPRSS2) cells. Notably, the Delta variant replicated well in Calu3 cell line which has robust TMPRSS2 expression, while the Omicron variant replicated poorly in this cell line. Competition assay showed that Delta variant outcompeted Omicron variant in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 and Calu3 cells. To confirm the difference in entry pathway between the Omicron and Delta variants, we assessed the antiviral effect of bafilomycin A1, chloroquine (inhibiting endocytic pathway), and camostat (inhibiting TMPRSS2 pathway). Camostat potently inhibited the Delta variant but not the Omicron variant, while bafilomycin A1 and chloroquine could inhibit both Omicron and Delta variants. Moreover, the Omicron variant also showed weaker cell-cell fusion activity when compared with Delta variant in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. Collectively, our results suggest that Omicron variant infection is not enhanced by TMPRSS2 but is largely mediated via the endocytic pathway. The difference in entry pathway between Omicron and Delta variants may have an implication on the clinical manifestations or disease severity.

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 · 10.1080/22221751.2021.2023329

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. Viral replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2, VeroE6 and Calu3 cells. (A) Viral replication kinetics in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (B) Viral replication kinetics in VeroE6 cells. (C) Viral replication kinetics in Calu3 cells. SARS-CoV-2 (0.1 TCID50 of Omicron or Delta variant) was inoculated to cells for viral infection. Cell culture supernatants were collected at indicated time points for RT-qPCR assay to determine viral RNA titres. Data are presented as mean ± SD from two independent experiments with four biological samples. * indicates P < 0.05, ** indicates P < 0.01 and *** indicates P < 0.001 when compared with Omicron variant.
Figure 1. Viral replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2, VeroE6 and Calu3 cells. (A) Viral replication kinetics in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (B) Viral replication kinetics in VeroE6 cells. (C) Viral replication kinetics in Calu3 cells. SARS-CoV-2 (0.1 TCID50 of Omicron or Delta variant) was inoculated to cells for viral infection. Cell culture supernatants were collected at indicated time points for RT-qPCR assay to determine viral RNA titres. Data are presented as mean ± SD from two independent experiments with four biological samples. * indicates P < 0.05, ** indicates P < 0.01 and *** indicates P < 0.001 when compared with Omicron variant.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2. Delta variant outcompeted the replication of Omicron variant in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 and Calu3 cells. VeroE6/TMPRSS2, VeroE6, and Calu3 cells were co-infected by the Delta and Omicron variants with the Delta:Omicron ratio of 1:10, 1:1 and 10:1. Cell culture supernatants were collected at 24 hpi (A) and 48 hpi (B) for next-generation sequencing. The percentage of reads corresponding to the Delta and Omicron variant is determined for spike amino acid residues 222 (Omicron: A; Delta: V), 655 (Omicron: Y; Delta H), and 950 (Omicron: D, Delta: N). * indicates P < 0.05, ** indicates P < 0.01 and *** indicates P < 0.001.
Figure 2. Delta variant outcompeted the replication of Omicron variant in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 and Calu3 cells. VeroE6/TMPRSS2, VeroE6, and Calu3 cells were co-infected by the Delta and Omicron variants with the Delta:Omicron ratio of 1:10, 1:1 and 10:1. Cell culture supernatants were collected at 24 hpi (A) and 48 hpi (B) for next-generation sequencing. The percentage of reads corresponding to the Delta and Omicron variant is determined for spike amino acid residues 222 (Omicron: A; Delta: V), 655 (Omicron: Y; Delta H), and 950 (Omicron: D, Delta: N). * indicates P < 0.05, ** indicates P < 0.01 and *** indicates P < 0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3. Camostat could not potently inhibit the replication of Omicron variant in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (A) Bafilomycin A1 inhibited the Omicron and Delta replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (B) Chloroquine inhibited the Omicron and Delta replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (C) Camostat could potently inhibit Delta variant but not Omicron variant replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. Cells were pretreated by the indicated bafilomycin A1, chloroquine or camostat before viral infection, 1000 TCID50 of virus was added to cells for infection and then viral RNA copies in cell lysate were measured at 8 hpi by RT-qPCR. Viral RNA (%) was normalized to the viral RNA copy of untreated virus. ** indicates P < 0.01 and *** indicates P < 0.001 when compared with untreated virus. Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent biological samples.
Figure 3. Camostat could not potently inhibit the replication of Omicron variant in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (A) Bafilomycin A1 inhibited the Omicron and Delta replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (B) Chloroquine inhibited the Omicron and Delta replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. (C) Camostat could potently inhibit Delta variant but not Omicron variant replication in VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. Cells were pretreated by the indicated bafilomycin A1, chloroquine or camostat before viral infection, 1000 TCID50 of virus was added to cells for infection and then viral RNA copies in cell lysate were measured at 8 hpi by RT-qPCR. Viral RNA (%) was normalized to the viral RNA copy of untreated virus. ** indicates P < 0.01 and *** indicates P < 0.001 when compared with untreated virus. Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent biological samples.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4. SARS-CoV-2 mediated cell-cell fusion. (A) Cell GFP images of infected cells at indicated post infection time. (B) Bright field images of infected cells at indicated post infection time. VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells were transfected with GFP plasmid and infected with 0.1 TCID50 virus (Omicron and Delta variant). Images were taken at 24, 48, and 72 hpi. GFP-transfected cells without viral infection were the negative control of cell fusion (no infection). Scale bar = 50 μm. Experiment images were taken from two independent biological samples.
Figure 4. SARS-CoV-2 mediated cell-cell fusion. (A) Cell GFP images of infected cells at indicated post infection time. (B) Bright field images of infected cells at indicated post infection time. VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells were transfected with GFP plasmid and infected with 0.1 TCID50 virus (Omicron and Delta variant). Images were taken at 24, 48, and 72 hpi. GFP-transfected cells without viral infection were the negative control of cell fusion (no infection). Scale bar = 50 μm. Experiment images were taken from two independent biological samples.CC BY · PubMed Central

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

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30196-1 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.cell.2021.02.053 · DOI
  4. 10.1038/s41467-020-20457-w · DOI
  5. 10.1038/s41586-021-03925-1 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1038/s41467-021-21825-w · DOI
  8. 10.1038/s42003-021-02640-x · DOI
  9. 10.1093/cid/ciaa1275 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103544 · DOI
  11. 10.1093/cid/ciab656 · DOI
  12. 10.1101/2021.11.11.21266068:2021.11.11.21266068 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02758-6 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2021.100360 · DOI
  15. 10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103643 · DOI
  16. 10.1038/s41580-021-00418-x · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1038/s41586-021-04266-9 · DOI
  18. 10.1038/s41564-021-00908-w · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109825 · DOI
  20. 10.1126/science.abl9463 · DOI
  21. 10.1038/s41586-021-03491-6 · DOI
  22. 10.1371/journal.ppat.1009820 · DOI
  23. 10.1038/s41586-020-2575-3 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 413

Metadata

Authors
Zhao, H., Lu, L., Peng, Z., Chen, L.-L., Meng, X., Zhang, C., Ip, J. D., Chan, W.-M., Chu, A. W.-H., Chan, K.-H., Jin, D.-Y., Chen, H., Yuen, K.-Y., & To, K. K.-W.
Affiliations
  • University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Queen Mary Hospital (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Zhao, Hanjun
  • To, Kelvin Kai-Wang
Venue
Emerging Microbes & Infections
Published
2022-01-19
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
277-283
ISSN
2222-1751 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4200625712
Cited by
413
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 197
FWCI
29.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Emerging Microbes & Infections (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Theme-Based Research Scheme (T11-709/21-N)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
Keywords
Omicron variant, Delta variant, viral entry pathways, TMPRSS2, endocytic pathway, viral replication, cell-cell fusion, camostat, bafilomycin A1, chloroquine, competition assay
MeSH terms
Whole Genome Sequencing, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Animals, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Chlorocebus aethiops, Chloroquine, Endocytosis, Esters, Guanidines, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Recombinant Proteins, Serine Endopeptidases, Vero Cells, Virus Cultivation, Virus Replication, Macrolides, Cell Line, Tumor, Virus Internalization, Immune Evasion

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