4.7 Article

A Mouse Model of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Pathogenesis

Journal

CELL HOST & MICROBE
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages 124-+

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2020.05.020

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Project of China, China [2016YFD0500304, 2020YFA0707801]
  2. National Science and Technology Major Project of China, China [2017ZX103304402, 2018ZX09711003]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China, China [82041006, 31871476]
  4. Guangdong Pearl River talent plan, China [2019CX01N111]
  5. National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholar, China [81925025]
  6. Innovative Research Group from the National Natural Science Foundation of China, China [81621005]
  7. Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences from the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, China [2019-I2M-5-049]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has emerged and rapidly spread throughout the world, resulting in a global public health emergency. The lack of vaccine and antivirals has brought an urgent need for an animal model. Human angiotensin-converting enzyme II (ACE2) has been identified as a functional receptor for SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we generated a mouse model expressing human ACE2 (hACE2) by using CRISPR/Cas9 knockin technology. In comparison with wild-type C57BL/6 mice, both young and aged hACE2 mice sustained high viral loads in lung, trachea, and brain upon intranasal infection. Although fatalities were not observed, interstitial pneumonia and elevated cytokines were seen in SARS-CoV-2 infected-aged hACE2 mice. Interestingly, intragastric inoculation of SARS-CoV-2 was seen to cause productive infection and lead to pulmonary pathological changes in hACE2 mice. Overall, this animal model described here provides a useful tool for studying SARS-CoV-2 transmission and pathogenesis and evaluating COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available