SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, has been associated with substantial global morbidity and mortality. Despite a tropism that is largely confined to the airways, COVID-19 is associated with multiorgan dysfunction and long-term cognitive pathologies. A major driver of this biology stems from the combined effects of virus-mediated interference with the host antiviral defences in infected cells and the sensing of pathogen-associated material by bystander cells. Such a dynamic results in delayed induction of type I and III interferons (IFN-I and IFN-III) at the site of infection, but systemic IFN-I and IFN-III priming in distal organs and barrier epithelial surfaces, respectively. In this Review, we examine the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 biology and the cellular response to infection, detailing how antagonism and dysregulation of host innate immune defences contribute to disease severity of COVID-19. 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-022-00839-1.pdf

Innate immune evasion strategies of SARS-CoV-2

SARS-CoV-2 is an RNA virus that was identified for the first time in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. The World Health Organization (WHO) labeled the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a worldwide pandemic on March 11, 2020, due to its widespread infectivity pattern. Because of the catastrophic COVID-19 outbreak, the development of safe and efficient vaccinations has become a key priority in every health sector throughout the globe. On the 13th of January 2021, the vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2 was launched in India and started the administration of two types of vaccines known as Covaxin and Covishield. Covishield is an adenovirus vector-based vaccine, and Covaxin was developed by a traditional method of vaccine formulation, which is composed of adjuvanted inactivated viral particles. Each vaccine's utility or efficiency is determined by its formulation, adjuvants, and mode of action. The efficacy of the vaccination depends on numeral properties like generation antibodies, memory cells, and cell-mediated immunity. According to the third-phase experiment, Covishield showed effectiveness of nearly 90%, whereas Covaxin has an effectiveness of about 80%. Both vaccination formulations in India have so far demonstrated satisfactory efficacy against numerous mutant variants of SARS-CoV-2. The efficacy of Covishield may be diminished if the structure of spike (S) protein changes dramatically in the future. In this situation, Covaxin might be still effective for such variants owing to its ability to produce multiple antibodies against various epitopes. This study reviews the comparative immunogenic and therapeutic efficacy of Covaxin and Covishield and also discussed the probable vaccination challenges in upcoming days. 

/pdf/immunogenic-and-reactogenic-efficacy-of-covaxin-and-21if9b8x.pdf

Immunogenic and reactogenic efficacy of Covaxin and Covishield: a comparative review

The genome of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) encodes 16 non-structural (Nsp) and 4 structural proteins. Among the Nsps, Nsp1 inhibits host gene expression and also evades the immune system. This protein has been proposed as a target for vaccine development and also for drug design. Owing to its important role, the current study aimed to identify mutations in Nsp1 and their effect on protein stability and flexibility. This is the first comprehensive study in which 295,000 complete genomes have been screened for mutations after alignment with the Wuhan-Hu-1 reference genome (Accession NC_045512), using the CoVsurver app. The sequences harbored 933 mutations in the entire coding region of Nsp1. The most frequently occurring mutation in the 180-amino-acid Nsp1 protein was R24C (n = 1122), followed by D75E (n = 890), D48G (n = 881), H110Y (n = 860), and D144A (n = 648). Among the 933 non-synonymous mutations, 529 exhibited a destabilizing effect. Similarly, a gain in flexibility was observed in 542 mutations. The majority of the most frequent mutations were detected in the loop regions. These findings imply that Nsp1 mutations might be useful to exploit SARS-CoV-2's pathogenicity. Genomic sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 on a regular basis will further assist in analyzing variations among the drug targets and to test the diagnostic accuracy. This wide range of mutations and their effect on Nsp1's stability may have some consequences for the host's innate immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and also for the vaccines' efficacy. Based on this mutational information, geographically strain-specific drugs, vaccines, and antibody combinations could be a useful strategy against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Emerging Mutations in Nsp1 of SARS-CoV-2 and Their Effect on the Structural Stability.

Viruses and their hosts have coevolved for a long time. This coevolution places both the pathogen and the human immune system under selective pressure; on the one hand, the immune system has evolved to combat viruses and virally infected cells, while viruses have developed sophisticated mechanisms to escape recognition and destruction by the immune system. SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen that is causing the current COVID-19 pandemic, has shown a remarkable ability to escape antibody neutralization, putting vaccine efficacy at risk. One of the virus’s immune evasion strategies is mitochondrial sabotage: by causing reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, mitochondrial physiology is impaired, and the interferon antiviral response is suppressed. Seminal studies have identified an intra-cytoplasmatic pathway for viral infection, which occurs through the construction of tunneling nanotubes (TNTs), hence enhancing infection and avoiding immune surveillance. Another method of evading immune monitoring is the disruption of the antigen presentation. In this scenario, SARS-CoV-2 infection reduces MHC-I molecule expression: SARS-CoV-2’s open reading frames (ORF 6 and ORF 8) produce viral proteins that specifically downregulate MHC-I molecules. All of these strategies are also exploited by other viruses to elude immune detection and should be studied in depth to improve the effectiveness of future antiviral treatments. Compared to the Wuhan strain or the Delta variant, Omicron has developed mutations that have impaired its ability to generate syncytia, thus reducing its pathogenicity. Conversely, other mutations have allowed it to escape antibody neutralization and preventing cellular immune recognition, making it the most contagious and evasive variant to date.

/pdf/sars-cov-2-a-master-of-immune-evasion-35h49y8j.pdf

SARS-CoV-2: A Master of Immune Evasion

Abstract Common alphacoronaviruses and human rhinoviruses (HRV) induce type I and III interferon (IFN) responses important to limiting viral replication in the airway epithelium. In contrast, highly pathogenic betacoronaviruses including SARS-CoV-2 may evade or antagonize RNA-induced IFN I/III responses. In airway epithelial cells (AECs) from children and older adults we compared IFN I/III responses to SARS-CoV-2 and HRV-16, and assessed whether pre-infection with HRV-16, or pretreatment with recombinant IFN-β or IFN-λ, modified SARS-CoV-2 replication. Bronchial AECs from children (ages 6–18 years) and older adults (ages 60–75 years) were differentiated ex vivo to generate organotypic cultures. In a biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) facility, cultures were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or HRV-16, and RNA and protein was harvested from cell lysates 96 h. following infection and supernatant was collected 48 and 96 h. following infection. In additional experiments cultures were pre-infected with HRV-16, or pre-treated with recombinant IFN-β1 or IFN-λ2 before SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a subset of experiments a range of infectious concentrations of HRV-16, SARS-CoV-2 WA-01, SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant, and SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant were studied. Despite significant between-donor heterogeneity SARS-CoV-2 replicated 100 times more efficiently than HRV-16. IFNB1, INFL2, and CXCL10 gene expression and protein production following HRV-16 infection was significantly greater than following SARS-CoV-2. IFN gene expression and protein production were inversely correlated with SARS-CoV-2 replication. Treatment of cultures with recombinant IFNβ1 or IFNλ2, or pre-infection of cultures with HRV-16, markedly reduced SARS-CoV-2 replication. In addition to marked between-donor heterogeneity in IFN responses and viral replication, SARS-CoV-2 (WA-01, Delta, and Omicron variants) elicits a less robust IFN response in primary AEC cultures than does rhinovirus, and heterologous rhinovirus infection, or treatment with recombinant IFN-β1 or IFN-λ2, reduces SARS-CoV-2 replication, although to a lesser degree for the Delta and Omicron variants. 

/pdf/airway-epithelial-interferon-response-to-sars-cov-2-is-n4p5f1pz.pdf

Airway epithelial interferon response to SARS-CoV-2 is inferior to rhinovirus and heterologous rhinovirus infection suppresses SARS-CoV-2 replication

The on-going pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to unprecedented medical and socioeconomic crises. Although the viral pathogenesis remains elusive, deficiency of effective antiviral interferon (IFN) responses upon SARS-CoV-2 infection has been recognized as a hallmark of COVID-19 contributing to the disease pathology and progress. Recently, multiple proteins encoded by SARS-CoV-2 have been shown to act as potential IFN antagonists with diverse possible mechanisms. Here, we summarize and discuss the strategies of SARS-CoV-2 for evasion of innate immunity (particularly the antiviral IFN responses), understanding of which will facilitate not only the elucidation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and pathogenesis but also the development of antiviral intervention therapies.

Mengzhuo Huang

Papers

Immune evasion of SARS-CoV-2 from interferon antiviral system.