SARS-CoV-2 Cell Entry Depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and Is Blocked by a Clinically Proven Protease Inhibitor
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 uses the SARS -CoV receptor ACE2 for entry and the serine protease TMPRSS2 for S protein priming, and it is shown that the sera from convalescent SARS patients cross-neutralized Sars-2-S-driven entry.
About: This article is published in Cell.The article was published on 2020-04-16 and is currently open access. It has received 15362 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Proteases.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Detailed virological analysis of nine cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides proof of active replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in tissues of the upper respiratory tract.
Abstract: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an acute infection of the respiratory tract that emerged in late 20191,2. Initial outbreaks in China involved 13.8% of cases with severe courses, and 6.1% of cases with critical courses3. This severe presentation may result from the virus using a virus receptor that is expressed predominantly in the lung2,4; the same receptor tropism is thought to have determined the pathogenicity—but also aided in the control—of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 20035. However, there are reports of cases of COVID-19 in which the patient shows mild upper respiratory tract symptoms, which suggests the potential for pre- or oligosymptomatic transmission6–8. There is an urgent need for information on virus replication, immunity and infectivity in specific sites of the body. Here we report a detailed virological analysis of nine cases of COVID-19 that provides proof of active virus replication in tissues of the upper respiratory tract. Pharyngeal virus shedding was very high during the first week of symptoms, with a peak at 7.11 × 108 RNA copies per throat swab on day 4. Infectious virus was readily isolated from samples derived from the throat or lung, but not from stool samples—in spite of high concentrations of virus RNA. Blood and urine samples never yielded virus. Active replication in the throat was confirmed by the presence of viral replicative RNA intermediates in the throat samples. We consistently detected sequence-distinct virus populations in throat and lung samples from one patient, proving independent replication. The shedding of viral RNA from sputum outlasted the end of symptoms. Seroconversion occurred after 7 days in 50% of patients (and by day 14 in all patients), but was not followed by a rapid decline in viral load. COVID-19 can present as a mild illness of the upper respiratory tract. The confirmation of active virus replication in the upper respiratory tract has implications for the containment of COVID-19. Detailed virological analysis of nine cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides proof of active replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in tissues of the upper respiratory tract.
5,840 citations
TL;DR: High-resolution crystal structures of the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS -CoV in complex with ACE2 provide insights into the binding mode of these coronaviruses and highlight essential ACE2-interacting residues.
Abstract: A new and highly pathogenic coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, SARS-CoV-2) caused an outbreak in Wuhan city, Hubei province, China, starting from December 2019 that quickly spread nationwide and to other countries around the world1–3. Here, to better understand the initial step of infection at an atomic level, we determined the crystal structure of the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 bound to the cell receptor ACE2. The overall ACE2-binding mode of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD is nearly identical to that of the SARS-CoV RBD, which also uses ACE2 as the cell receptor4. Structural analysis identified residues in the SARS-CoV-2 RBD that are essential for ACE2 binding, the majority of which either are highly conserved or share similar side chain properties with those in the SARS-CoV RBD. Such similarity in structure and sequence strongly indicate convergent evolution between the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV RBDs for improved binding to ACE2, although SARS-CoV-2 does not cluster within SARS and SARS-related coronaviruses1–3,5. The epitopes of two SARS-CoV antibodies that target the RBD are also analysed for binding to the SARS-CoV-2 RBD, providing insights into the future identification of cross-reactive antibodies. High-resolution crystal structures of the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV in complex with ACE2 provide insights into the binding mode of these coronaviruses and highlight essential ACE2-interacting residues.
4,555 citations
Karolinska Institutet1, Uppsala University2, University of Glasgow3, University College London4, University of Oxford5, King's College London6, University of Exeter7, Black Dog Institute8, University of California, Irvine9, University of Cambridge10, Swansea University11, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust12, UCL Institute of Child Health13, St George's, University of London14, Emory University15, University of Bristol16, Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom17
TL;DR: There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19.
3,909 citations
TL;DR: This review discusses current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic that has caused a worldwide sudden and substantial increase in hospitalizations for pneumonia with multiorgan disease.
Abstract: Importance The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has caused a worldwide sudden and substantial increase in hospitalizations for pneumonia with multiorgan disease. This review discusses current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19. Observations SARS-CoV-2 is spread primarily via respiratory droplets during close face-to-face contact. Infection can be spread by asymptomatic, presymptomatic, and symptomatic carriers. The average time from exposure to symptom onset is 5 days, and 97.5% of people who develop symptoms do so within 11.5 days. The most common symptoms are fever, dry cough, and shortness of breath. Radiographic and laboratory abnormalities, such as lymphopenia and elevated lactate dehydrogenase, are common, but nonspecific. Diagnosis is made by detection of SARS-CoV-2 via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, although false-negative test results may occur in up to 20% to 67% of patients; however, this is dependent on the quality and timing of testing. Manifestations of COVID-19 include asymptomatic carriers and fulminant disease characterized by sepsis and acute respiratory failure. Approximately 5% of patients with COVID-19, and 20% of those hospitalized, experience severe symptoms necessitating intensive care. More than 75% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 require supplemental oxygen. Treatment for individuals with COVID-19 includes best practices for supportive management of acute hypoxic respiratory failure. Emerging data indicate that dexamethasone therapy reduces 28-day mortality in patients requiring supplemental oxygen compared with usual care (21.6% vs 24.6%; age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.92]) and that remdesivir improves time to recovery (hospital discharge or no supplemental oxygen requirement) from 15 to 11 days. In a randomized trial of 103 patients with COVID-19, convalescent plasma did not shorten time to recovery. Ongoing trials are testing antiviral therapies, immune modulators, and anticoagulants. The case-fatality rate for COVID-19 varies markedly by age, ranging from 0.3 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 5 to 17 years to 304.9 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 85 years or older in the US. Among patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit, the case fatality is up to 40%. At least 120 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are under development. Until an effective vaccine is available, the primary methods to reduce spread are face masks, social distancing, and contact tracing. Monoclonal antibodies and hyperimmune globulin may provide additional preventive strategies. Conclusions and Relevance As of July 1, 2020, more than 10 million people worldwide had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Many aspects of transmission, infection, and treatment remain unclear. Advances in prevention and effective management of COVID-19 will require basic and clinical investigation and public health and clinical interventions.
3,371 citations
Cites background from "SARS-CoV-2 Cell Entry Depends on AC..."
...quartile range) interval from symptom onset to hospital admission is 7 (3-9) days....
[...]
...The mean (interquartile range) incubation period (the time from exposure to symptom onset) for COVID-19 is approximately 5 (2-7) days....
[...]
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai1, University of Michigan2, Pasteur Institute3, University of California, San Francisco4, European Bioinformatics Institute5, University of California, San Diego6, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill7, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center8, Gladstone Institutes9, Buck Institute for Research on Aging10
TL;DR: A human–SARS-CoV-2 protein interaction map highlights cellular processes that are hijacked by the virus and that can be targeted by existing drugs, including inhibitors of mRNA translation and predicted regulators of the sigma receptors.
Abstract: A newly described coronavirus named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has infected over 2.3 million people, led to the death of more than 160,000 individuals and caused worldwide social and economic disruption1,2. There are no antiviral drugs with proven clinical efficacy for the treatment of COVID-19, nor are there any vaccines that prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2, and efforts to develop drugs and vaccines are hampered by the limited knowledge of the molecular details of how SARS-CoV-2 infects cells. Here we cloned, tagged and expressed 26 of the 29 SARS-CoV-2 proteins in human cells and identified the human proteins that physically associated with each of the SARS-CoV-2 proteins using affinity-purification mass spectrometry, identifying 332 high-confidence protein–protein interactions between SARS-CoV-2 and human proteins. Among these, we identify 66 druggable human proteins or host factors targeted by 69 compounds (of which, 29 drugs are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, 12 are in clinical trials and 28 are preclinical compounds). We screened a subset of these in multiple viral assays and found two sets of pharmacological agents that displayed antiviral activity: inhibitors of mRNA translation and predicted regulators of the sigma-1 and sigma-2 receptors. Further studies of these host-factor-targeting agents, including their combination with drugs that directly target viral enzymes, could lead to a therapeutic regimen to treat COVID-19. A human–SARS-CoV-2 protein interaction map highlights cellular processes that are hijacked by the virus and that can be targeted by existing drugs, including inhibitors of mRNA translation and predicted regulators of the sigma receptors.
3,319 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: It is found that an intact S1/S2 site was only required for efficient entry into cells expressing endogenous TMPRSS2, and findings suggest that cleavage at S2′ is carried out by proteases recognizing a single arginine, most likely TMPR SS2 and cathepsin L.
Abstract: The Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (MERS-CoV) can cause severe disease and has pandemic potential. Therefore, development of antiviral strategies is an important task. The activation of the viral spike protein (S) by host cell proteases is essential for viral infectivity and the responsible enzymes are potential therapeutic targets. The cellular proteases furin, cathepsin L and TMPRSS2 can activate MERS-S and may cleave the S protein at two distinct sites, termed S1/S2 and S2′. Moreover, a potential cathepsin L cleavage site in MERS-S has been reported. However, the relative importance of these sites for MERS-S activation is incompletely understood. Here, we used mutagenic analysis and MERS-S-bearing vectors to study the contribution of specific cleavage sites to S protein-driven entry. We found that an intact S1/S2 site was only required for efficient entry into cells expressing endogenous TMPRSS2. In keeping with a previous study, pre-cleavage at the S1/S2 motif (RSVR) was important although not essential for subsequent MERS-S activation by TMPRSS2, and indirect evidence was obtained that this motif is processed by a protease depending on an intact RXXR motif, most likely furin. In contrast, the S2′ site (RSAR) was required for robust viral entry into all cell lines tested and the integrity of one of the two arginines was sufficient for efficient entry. These findings suggest that cleavage at S2′ is carried out by proteases recognizing a single arginine, most likely TMPRSS2 and cathepsin L. Finally, mutation of the proposed cathepsin L site did not impact viral entry and double mutation of S1/S2 and S2′ site was compatible with cathepsin L- but not TMPRSS2-dependent host cell entry, indicating that cathepsin L can process the S protein at auxiliary sites. Collectively, our results indicate a rigid sequence requirement for S protein activation by TMPRSS2 but not cathepsin L.
120 citations
TL;DR: Although HKU4 spike cannot mediate viral entry into human cells, two mutations enabled it to do so by allowing it to be activated by human proteases, explaining why MERS-CoV infects human cells.
Abstract: To understand how Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) transmitted from bats to humans, we compared the virus surface spikes of MERS-CoV and a related bat coronavirus, HKU4. Although HKU4 spike cannot mediate viral entry into human cells, two mutations enabled it to do so by allowing it to be activated by human proteases. These mutations are present in MERS-CoV spike, explaining why MERS-CoV infects human cells. These mutations therefore played critical roles in the bat-to-human transmission of MERS-CoV, either directly or through intermediate hosts.
119 citations
"SARS-CoV-2 Cell Entry Depends on AC..." refers background in this paper
...Notably, the cleavage site sequence can determine the zoonotic potential of coronaviruses (Menachery et al., 2020; Yang et al., 2014 Yang et al., , 2015 , and a multibasic cleavage site was not present in RaTG13, the coronavirus most closely related to SARS-CoV-2....
[...]
TL;DR: The results suggest that the endosomal pathway is disadvantageous for HCoV-229E infection of human airway epithelial cells; therefore, clinical isolates are less able to use cathepsin.
Abstract: Human coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E), a causative agent of the common cold, enters host cells via two distinct pathways: one is mediated by cell surface proteases, particularly transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2), and the other by endosomal cathepsin L. Thus, specific inhibitors of these proteases block virus infection. However, it is unclear which of these pathways is actually utilized by HCoV-229E in the human respiratory tract. Here, we examined the mechanism of cell entry used by a pseudotyped virus bearing the HCoV-229E spike (S) protein in the presence or absence of protease inhibitors. We found that, compared with a laboratory strain isolated in 1966 and passaged for a half century, clinical isolates of HCoV-229E were less likely to utilize cathepsin L; rather, they showed a preference for TMPRSS2. Two amino acid substitutions (R642M and N714K) in the S protein of HCoV-229E clinical isolates altered their sensitivity to a cathepsin L inhibitor, suggesting that these amino acids were responsible for cathepsin L use. After 20 passages in HeLa cells, the ability of the isolate to use cathepsin increased so that it was equal to that of the laboratory strain; this increase was caused by an amino acid substitution (I577S) in the S protein. The passaged virus showed a reduced ability to replicate in differentiated airway epithelial cells cultured at an air-liquid interface. These results suggest that the endosomal pathway is disadvantageous for HCoV-229E infection of human airway epithelial cells; therefore, clinical isolates are less able to use cathepsin. IMPORTANCE Many enveloped viruses enter cells through endocytosis. Viral spike proteins drive the fusion of viral and endosomal membranes to facilitate insertion of the viral genome into the cytoplasm. Human coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E) utilizes endosomal cathepsin L to activate the spike protein after receptor binding. Here, we found that clinical isolates of HCoV-229E preferentially utilize the cell surface protease TMPRSS2 rather than endosomal cathepsin L. The endosome is a main site of Toll-like receptor recognition, which then triggers an innate immune response; therefore, HCoV-229E presumably evolved to bypass the endosome by entering the cell via TMPRSS2. Thus, the virus uses a simple mechanism to evade the host innate immune system. Therefore, therapeutic agents for coronavirus-mediated diseases, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), should target cell surface TMPRSS2 rather than endosomal cathepsin.
116 citations
"SARS-CoV-2 Cell Entry Depends on AC..." refers background in this paper
...However, only TMPRSS2 activity is essential for viral spread and pathogenesis in the infected host whereas CatB/L activity is dispensable (Iwata-Yoshikawa et al., 2019; Shirato et al., 2016; Shirato et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2015)....
[...]
TL;DR: All six human CoVs can be diagnosed using RT-PCR on respiratory specimens but this is rarely necessary for the four endemic strains, and a possible MERS-CoV infection should be taken into account in patients with typical symptoms and travel history to endemic regions.
Abstract: Es gibt sechs humanpathogene Coronaviren (CoV), die vornehmlich respiratorische Infektionen auslosen. Im klinischen Alltag ist es hilfreich, Relevanz und Besonderheiten dieser Erreger zu kennen. Praxisnahe Darstellung der Epidemiologie, Klinik und Unterschiede humanpathogener CoV. Hinweise zu Diagnostik und Umgang mit Patienten bei Verdacht auf eine CoV-Infektion. Selektive Literaturrecherche, Darstellung und Diskussion von Grundlagenarbeiten und Expertenempfehlungen einschlieslich der Veroffentlichungen der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO), des Europaischen Zentrums fur die Pravention und die Kontrolle von Krankheiten (ECDC) und des Robert Koch-Instituts. Die weltweit endemischen CoV (HCoV-NL63, -229E, -OC43 und -HKU1) sind haufige Ursache von leichteren respiratorischen Infektionen. Zwei epidemische, zoonotische Coronaviren (SARS- und MERS-CoV, MERS „Middle East respiratory syndrome“, SARS „severe acute respiratory syndrome“ [schweres akutes Atemwegssyndrom]) konnen schwere Pneumonien hervorrufen. SARS-CoV ist seit 15 Jahren nicht mehr im Menschen nachgewiesen worden. MERS-CoV zirkuliert seit 2012 hauptsachlich auf der Arabischen Halbinsel. Eine spezifische Therapie oder zugelassene Impfung existiert noch fur keines der sechs humanpathogenen Coronaviren. Eine Erregerdiagnostik mittels Polymerase-Kettenreaktion aus respiratorischem Material ist fur alle CoV moglich, fur die vier endemischen allerdings selten notwendig. SARS-CoV hat aktuell keine Relevanz in der Klinik, da es seit 15 Jahren nicht mehr im Menschen nachgewiesen wurde. Der Verdacht auf eine MERS-Infektion sollte hingegen bei entsprechender Symptomatik und Reiseanamnese differenzialdiagnostisch in Betracht gezogen werden. Hier sind eine schnelle Diagnosesicherung und allgemeine Hygienemasnahmen zur Verhinderung der Verbreitung entscheidend.
116 citations
TL;DR: Results indicate that bat cells are more resistant to infection by coronaviruses than to infections by paramyxoviruses, filovirus and influenza viruses, and show a receptor-dependent restriction of the infection of bat cells by CoV.
Abstract: Bats (Chiroptera) host major human pathogenic viruses including corona-, paramyxo, rhabdo- and filoviruses. We analyzed six different cell lines from either Yinpterochiroptera (including African flying foxes and a rhinolophid bat) or Yangochiroptera (genera Carollia and Tadarida) for susceptibility to infection by different enveloped RNA viruses. None of the cells were sensitive to infection by transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), a porcine coronavirus, or to infection mediated by the Spike (S) protein of SARS-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) incorporated into pseudotypes based on vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV). The resistance to infection was overcome if cells were transfected to express the respective cellular receptor, porcine aminopeptidase N for TGEV or angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 for SARS-CoV. VSV pseudotypes containing the S proteins of two bat SARS-related CoV (Bg08 and Rp3) were unable to infect any of the six tested bat cell lines. By contrast, viral pseudotypes containing the surface protein GP of Marburg virus from the family Filoviridae infected all six cell lines though at different efficiency. Notably, all cells were sensitive to infection by two paramyxoviruses (Sendai virus and bovine respiratory syncytial virus) and three influenza viruses from different subtypes. These results indicate that bat cells are more resistant to infection by coronaviruses than to infection by paramyxoviruses, filoviruses and influenza viruses. Furthermore, these results show a receptor-dependent restriction of the infection of bat cells by CoV. The implications for the isolation of coronaviruses from bats are discussed.
106 citations
"SARS-CoV-2 Cell Entry Depends on AC..." refers background or result in this paper
...In contrast, most of these residues were absent from S proteins of SARSrCoV previously found not to use ACE2 for entry (Figure 2B) (Ge et al., 2013; Hoffmann et al., 2013; Menachery et al., 2020)....
[...]
...dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 (DPP4) and human TMPRSS2 have been described elsewhere (Bertram et al., 2010; Brinkmann et al., 2017; Gierer et al., 2013; Hoffmann et al., 2013; Hofmann et al., 2005; Kleine-Weber et al., 2019)....
[...]