4.7 Article

Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 by Destruction of the Prefusion Spike

Journal

CELL HOST & MICROBE
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 445-+

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2020.06.010

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CAMS-Oxford Institute
  2. Wellcome Trust [101122/Z/13/Z, 095541/A/11/Z, 090532/Z/09/Z]
  3. Cancer Research UK [C375/A17721, C20724/A14414, C20724/A26752]
  4. UK Medical Research Council [MR/N00065X/1]
  5. EPA Cephalosporin Fund
  6. Rosalind Franklin Institute EPSRC grant [EP/S025243/1]
  7. Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) Innovation Fund for Medical Science (CIFMS) [2018-I2M-2-002]
  8. National Institutes for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre Funding Scheme
  9. EPSRC [EP/S025243/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  10. MRC [MR/N00065X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are as yet no licensed therapeutics for the COVID-19 pandemic. The causal coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) binds host cells via a trimeric spike whose receptor binding domain (RBD) recognizes angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, initiating conformational changes that drive membrane fusion. We find that the monoclonal antibody CR3022 binds the RBD tightly, neutralizing SARS-CoV-2, and report the crystal structure at 2.4 angstrom of the Fab/RBD complex. Some crystals are suitable for screening for entry-blocking inhibitors. The highly conserved, structure-stabilizing CR3022 epitope is inaccessible in the prefusion spike, suggesting that CR3022 binding facilitates conversion to the fusion-incompetent post-fusion state. Cryogenic electron microscopy (cryo-EM) analysis confirms that incubation of spike with CR3022 Fab leads to destruction of the prefusion trimer. Presentation of this cryptic epitope in an RBD-based vaccine might advantageously focus immune responses. Binders at this epitope could be useful therapeutically, possibly in synergy with an antibody that blocks receptor attachment.

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