4.7 Article

Sex Differences in Lung Imaging and SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Responses in a COVID-19 Golden Syrian Hamster Model

期刊

MBIO
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/mBio.00974-21

关键词

animal model; COVID-19; sex differences; SARS-CoV-2 variants; receptor-binding domain

资金

  1. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
  2. Johns Hopkins Center of Excellence in Influenza Research and Surveillance (CEIRS) [HHSN272201400007C]
  3. NIH/NCI COVID-19 Serology Center of Excellence [U54CA260492]
  4. NIH/ORWH/NIA Specialized Center of Research Excellence in Sex Differences [U54AG062333, R01AI153349]
  5. Center for Infection and Inflammation Imaging Research (Johns Hopkins University)
  6. NIH [T32OD011089]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Male and female golden Syrian hamsters infected with SARS-CoV-2 exhibit different pathophysiological characteristics, with males experiencing more severe illness, slower recovery, and females generating stronger antibody responses. This animal model provides insights into COVID-19 sex differences and vaccine-induced immunity.
In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), more severe outcomes are reported in males than in females, including hospitalizations and deaths. Animal models can provide an opportunity to mechanistically interrogate causes of sex differences in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2. Adult male and female golden Syrian hamsters (8 to 10 weeks of age) were inoculated intranasally with 105 50% tissue culture infective dose (TCID50) of SARS-CoV-2/USA-WA1/2020 and euthanized at several time points during the acute (i.e., virus actively replicating) and recovery (i.e., after the infectious virus has been cleared) phases of infection. There was no mortality, but infected male hamsters experienced greater morbidity, losing a greater percentage of body mass, developed more extensive pneumonia as noted on chest computed tomography, and recovered more slowly than females. Treatment of male hamsters with estradiol did not alter pulmonary damage. Virus titers in respiratory tissues, including nasal turbinates, trachea, and lungs, and pulmonary cytokine concentrations, including interferon-beta (IFN-beta) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), were comparable between the sexes. However, during the recovery phase of infection, females mounted 2-fold greater IgM, IgG, and IgA responses against the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein (S-RBD) in both plasma and respiratory tissues. Female hamsters also had significantly greater IgG antibodies against whole-inactivated SARS-CoV-2 and mutant S-RBDs as well as virus-neutralizing antibodies in plasma. The development of an animal model to study COVID-19 sex differences will allow for a greater mechanistic understanding of the SARS-CoV-2-associated sex differences seen in the human population. IMPORTANCE Men experience more severe outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) than women. Golden Syrian hamsters were used to explore sex differences in the pathogenesis of a human isolate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). After inoculation, male hamsters experienced greater sickness, developed more severe lung pathology, and recovered more slowly than females. Sex differences in disease could not be reversed by estradiol treatment in males and were not explained by either virus replication kinetics or the concentrations of inflammatory cytokines in the lungs. During the recovery period, antiviral antibody responses in the respiratory tract and plasma, including to newly emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants, were greater in female than in male hamsters. Greater lung pathology during the acute phase combined with lower antiviral antibody responses during the recovery phase of infection in males than in females illustrate the utility of golden Syrian hamsters as a model to explore sex differences in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 and vaccine-induced immunity and protection.

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

4.7
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