4.6 Article

Characterization of a human monoclonal antibody generated from a B-cell specific for a prefusion-stabilized spike protein of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 15, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232757

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea National Institute of Health fund [2016-NG47001-00, 4845-300-210-13]
  2. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH, USA
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [ZIAAI005125] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. Korea Health Promotion Institute [2016-NG47001-00] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) causes severe respiratory infection and continues to infect humans, thereby contributing to a high mortality rate (34.3% in 2019). In the absence of an available licensed vaccine and antiviral agent, therapeutic human antibodies have been suggested as candidates for treatment. In this study, human monoclonal antibodies were isolated by sorting B cells from patient's PBMC cells with prefusion stabilized spike (S) probes and a direct immunoglobulin cloning strategy. We identified six receptor-binding domain (RBD)-specific and five S1 (non-RBD)-specific antibodies, among which, only the RBD-specific antibodies showed high neutralizing potency (IC50 0.006-1.787 mu g/ml) as well as high affinity to RBD. Notably, passive immunization using a highly potent antibody (KNIH90-F1) at a relatively low dose (2 mg/kg) completely protected transgenic mice expressing human DPP4 against MERS-CoV lethal challenge. These results suggested that human monoclonal antibodies isolated by using the rationally designed prefusion MERS-CoV S probe could be considered potential candidates for the development of therapeutic and/or prophylactic antiviral agents for MERS-CoV human infection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据