Resistance of Omicron subvariants BA.2.75.2, BA.4.6, and BQ.1.1 to neutralizing antibodies.

Convergent evolution of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2, BA.4, and BA.5 lineages has led to the emergence of several new subvariants, including BA.2.75.2, BA.4.6. and BQ.1.1. The subvariant BQ.1.1 became predominant in many countries in December 2022. The subvariants carry an additional and often redundant set of mutations in the spike, likely responsible for increased transmissibility and immune evasion. Here, we established a viral amplification procedure to easily isolate Omicron strains. We examined their sensitivity to 6 therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and to 72 sera from Pfizer BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals, with or without BA.1/BA.2 or BA.5 breakthrough infection. Ronapreve (Casirivimab and Imdevimab) and Evusheld (Cilgavimab and Tixagevimab) lose antiviral efficacy against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1, whereas Xevudy (Sotrovimab) remaine weakly active. BQ.1.1 is also resistant to Bebtelovimab. Neutralizing titers in triply vaccinated individuals are low to undetectable against BQ.1.1 and BA.2.75.2, 4 months after boosting. A BA.1/BA.2 breakthrough infection increases these titers, which remains about 18-fold lower against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1, than against BA.1. Reciprocally, a BA.5 breakthrough infection increases more efficiently neutralization against BA.5 and BQ.1.1 than against BA.2.75.2. Thus, the evolution trajectory of novel Omicron subvariants facilitates their spread in immunized populations and raises concerns about the efficacy of most available mAbs.

Fusogenicity and neutralization sensitivity of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta sublineage AY.4.2.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 lineages are continuously evolving. As of December 2021, the AY.4.2 Delta sub-lineage represented 20 % of sequenced strains in the UK and had been detected in dozens of countries. It has since then been supplanted by Omicron. The AY.4.2 spike displays three additional mutations (T95I, Y145H and A222V) in the N-terminal domain when compared to the original Delta variant (B.1.617.2) and remains poorly characterized. METHODS: We compared the Delta and the AY.4.2 spikes, by assessing their binding to antibodies and ACE2 and their fusogenicity. We studied the sensitivity of an authentic AY.4.2 viral isolate to neutralizing antibodies. FINDINGS: The AY.4.2 spike exhibited similar binding to all the antibodies and sera tested, and similar fusogenicity and binding to ACE2 than the ancestral Delta spike. The AY.4.2 virus was slightly less sensitive than Delta to neutralization by a panel of monoclonal antibodies; noticeably, the anti-RBD Imdevimab showed incomplete neutralization. Sensitivity of AY.4.2 to sera from vaccinated individuals was reduced by 1.3 to 3-fold, when compared to Delta. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that mutations in the NTD remotely impair the efficacy of anti-RBD antibodies. The spread of AY.4.2 was not due to major changes in spike fusogenicity or ACE2 binding, but more likely to a partially reduced neutralization sensitivity. FUNDING: The work was funded by Institut Pasteur, Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale, Urgence COVID-19 Fundraising Campaign of Institut Pasteur, ANRS, the Vaccine Research Institute, Labex IBEID, ANR/FRM Flash Covid PROTEO-SARS-CoV-2 and IDISCOVR.