PreprintCited by 258SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchAnimal Virus Infections Studiesvaccines and immunoinformatics approaches

A human coronavirus evolves antigenically to escape antibody immunity

Open access
Eguia, Rachel, Crawford, Katharine H. D., Stevens-Ayers, Terry, Kelnhofer-Millevolte, Laurel, Greninger, Alexander L., Englund, Janet A., Boeckh, Michael J., Bloom, Jesse D.·2020·PLoS Pathogens

Preprint — published as 10.1371/journal.ppat.1009453

Abstract

There is intense interest in antibody immunity to coronaviruses. However, it is unknown if coronaviruses evolve to escape such immunity, and if so, how rapidly. Here we address this question by characterizing the historical evolution of human coronavirus 229E. We identify human sera from the 1980s and 1990s that have neutralizing titers against contemporaneous 229E that are comparable to the anti-SARS-CoV-2 titers induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. We test these sera against 229E strains isolated after sera collection, and find that neutralizing titers are lower against these “future” viruses. In some cases, sera that neutralize contemporaneous 229E viral strains with titers >1:100 do not detectably neutralize strains isolated 8–17 years later. The decreased neutralization of “future” viruses is due to antigenic evolution of the viral spike, especially in the receptor-binding domain. If these results extrapolate to other coronaviruses, then it may be advisable to periodically update SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

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 · 10.1101/2020.12.17.423313

Cites

98 of 98 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?

  • Other groups have reported comparable findings with vaccinee and convalescent plasma across various pseudotype and authentic virus assays.

    “In addition, similar results have been reported by others using vaccinee and convalescent plasmas and a variety of different pseudotype and authentic virus assays15,31,45–49.”

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

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Kemp, S. (2020). Neutralising antibodies drive Spike mediated SARS-CoV-2 evasion | medRxiv. BioRxiv.
  2. Kemp, S.A., Collier, D.A., Datir, R., Gayed, S., Jahun, A., Hosmillo, M., Ferreira, I., Rees-Spear, C., Mlcochova, P., Lumb, I.U., et al. (2020). Neutralising antibodies drive Spike mediated SARS-CoV-2 evasion. MedRxiv 2020.12.05.20241927.
  3. Lumley, S.F., O'Donnell, D., Stoesser, N.E., Matthews, P.C., Howarth, A., Hatch, S.B., Marsden, B.D., Cox, S., James, T., Warren, F., et al. (2020). Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are associated with protection against reinfection. MedRxiv 2020.11.18.20234369.
  4. Muñoz-Alía, M.Á., Nace, R.A., Zhang, L., and Russell, S.J. (2020). Pathogenic measles viruses cannot evolve to bypass vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies. BioRxiv 2020.10.22.351189.
  5. Thomson, E. (2020). The circulating SARS-CoV-2 spike variant N439K maintains fitness while evading antibody-mediated immunity | bioRxiv. BioRxiv.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eguia, R., Crawford, K. H. D., Stevens-Ayers, T., Kelnhofer-Millevolte, L., Greninger, A. L., Englund, J. A., Boeckh, M. J., & Bloom, J. D.
Affiliations
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Bloom, Jesse D.
Venue
PLoS Pathogens
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2020-12-18
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
e1009453-e1009453
ISSN
1553-7366 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3144378969
Cited by
258
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 103 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
17.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • PLoS Pathogens (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Pfizer
  • AstraZeneca
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Sanofi
  • Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
  • Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
  • Moderna
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Sanofi Pasteur
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007266)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01AI127893, F30AI149928, R01AI141707)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Virus Infections Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
Keywords
HCoV-229E, antigenic evolution, antibody escape, neutralizing antibodies, spike protein, receptor binding domain, coronavirus evolution
MeSH terms
SARS-CoV-2, Antibodies, Viral, Humans, Coronavirus 229E, Human, Immune Evasion, Antibodies, Neutralizing

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