SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma • Hacker News Board

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#111

Post by chemeng » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 7:57 PM UTC

timr wrote: post #98

chemeng wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was just hoping to point out for those who aren't as close to this space that the fact that non-neutralizing antibodies can bind is neither a positive nor negative signal. Also, what I wrote is not speculation: The potential danger of suboptimal antibody responses in COVID-19 ( https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-020-0321-6 ) (Overview) COVID-19-neutralizing antibodies predict disease severity and survival ( https…

Neither of these papers supports the claim you made. The first one explicitly says that antibody-dependent enhancement has not been observed for this virus: > There is no evidence that ADE facilitates the spread of SARS-CoV in infected hosts. In fact, infection of macrophages through ADE does not result in productive viral replication and shedding "suboptimal antibody responses" are indeed...suboptimal...but the pape…

You edited your comment after I had responded, so hopefully I can address those concerns. I'm not sure the "claim" you think I am making.

As for increased infectivity, that is at the core of what is understood to occur in ADE. And in general, cases where the Fc mediated response is utilized to gain entry to immune cells. I believe Dengue is the typical example spoken to, but this pattern has been observed in Zika, HIV, RSV off the top of my head.

Lots of editing! Also, did not state that ADE occurs for SARS-CoV2. The fact that studies indicate it does not replicate or shed after phagocytosis is a positive signal.

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#112

Post by NeutronStar » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 7:58 PM UTC

chemeng wrote: post #81

gewa wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please note, that neutralization by antibodies is only one of the many possible ways how our immune system can take action. Antibody recognition is still possible with the found mutant: "To determine whether 501Y.V2 is still recognized by non-neutralizing antibodies, the binding of polyclonal sera (from Fig.2a) to a recombinant 501Y.V2 RBD+SBD1 protein and an RBD+SBD1 from the original lineage was assessed by ELISA (…

This is correct, but just want to add that many may interpret this as a positive sign, it is not necessarily. In many cases, binding antibodies increase cell infectivity. Also, there is some research that indicates the presence of non-neutralizing antibodies without the corresponding neutralizing antibodies and humoral response may be a factor in the development of antibody dependent enhancement. As far as we know, i…

Unless you source something, I'm going to take this as your opinion instead.

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#113

Post by bluGill » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 8:02 PM UTC

CyberRabbi wrote: post #57

godmode2019 wrote: post #31

Question: How would this affect severity? My basic understanding is because this is a new virus humans have very little existing immunity, which is the problem and why we don't die from colds. Over time our bodies get better at dealing with the virus and the virus gets better dealing with us. I read a paper on hn to this effect a little while ago, I'll provide source if needed.

I think in general not causing death in the target host is a naturally selected trait in viruses. The least lethal viruses are the ones that spread the most. This has been observed in herpes, which has evolved to infect nervous system cells but explicitly not nerve cells in the brain (which would cause death). So considering that, perhaps future strains of COVID will reduce their lethality while increasing their abil…

maybe. Measles was around for years and deadly. It (much like covid) could spread before it killed. Also like COVID it doesn't kill everyone it infects.

HIV/AIDS mutates a lot, but doesn't seem to be mutating in such a way as to not kill the host, you can be infected for 5-10 years before it kills you which is plenty of time to pass it on. It appears that a tiny number of people have a genetic immunity to HIV/AIDS, and so they could be the only survivors - which would mean that left unchecked humans will mutate to not be vulnerable to AIDS. (modern medical treatment has made significant progress on HIV/AIDS that I'm ignoring for this point)

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#114

Post by bluGill » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 8:04 PM UTC

PeterStuer wrote: post #25

the government of my region has decide that instead of following normal vaccination procedures, they will spread the available vaccine (Pfizer) to just give 1 dose to as many people as possible as opposed to the 2 required to be effective as per the clinical trials and the manufacturers advice. This decision is purely political, defying all biological evidence. Seems to me this is the perfect scenario to evolve vacci…

Probably not. The second dose of the vaccine is more about ensuring that you are covered for a long time. So long as everyone gets the second dose in a few months we are fine. If we wipe out COVID there is no reason to give second doses at all.

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#115

Post by rflrob » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 8:13 PM UTC

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #75

dkural wrote: post #69

Today Biontech also announced results showing induces a similarly strong immune response against the new variants, although I haven't read the details. .

Link? Edit: If you're talking about this press release, I believe this is referencing a different variant. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...

It is a different variant, but both the 501Y.V2 ("South African lineage" tested in OP) and B.1.1.7 ("UK lineage" tested in the Pfizer study you linked) have the N501Y spike mutation, which (I gather) is the residue of particular concern.

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#116

Post by timr » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 8:25 PM UTC

chemeng wrote: post #111

timr wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither of these papers supports the claim you made. The first one explicitly says that antibody-dependent enhancement has not been observed for this virus: > There is no evidence that ADE facilitates the spread of SARS-CoV in infected hosts. In fact, infection of macrophages through ADE does not result in productive viral replication and shedding "suboptimal antibody responses" are indeed...suboptimal...but the pape…

You edited your comment after I had responded, so hopefully I can address those concerns. I'm not sure the "claim" you think I am making. As for increased infectivity, that is at the core of what is understood to occur in ADE. And in general, cases where the Fc mediated response is utilized to gain entry to immune cells. I believe Dengue is the typical example spoken to, but this pattern has been observed in Zika, HI…

> I'm not sure the "claim" you think I am making. As for increased infectivity, that is at the core of what is understood to occur in ADE.

>> In many cases, binding antibodies increase cell infectivity.

^ This is what you wrote. It is unsupported. ADE is rare, and it has not been observed with this virus.

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#117

Post by towhom » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 8:41 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #104

beamatronic wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With total and complete mask compliance.

Please stop repeating this. Repetition is tedious and lowers signal/noise ratio. HN is supposed to be for curiosity, and curiosity wants just the opposite. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... Edit: also, can you please stop posting unsubstantive comments generally? It looks like you've been doing that a lot, and that's not what HN is for, fo…

What exactly is the problem with saying wearing masks is going to help us get out of this?

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#118

Post by CWuestefeld » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 9:30 PM UTC

valarauko wrote: post #85

CWuestefeld wrote: post #56

This is how the FDA's refusal to balance up-side risk is going to damage all of us. They're only interested in minimizing the risk from a treatment itself, and pay little to no attention to the risk from not having any treatment. It's been a full year since the first vaccines were formulated, and it took the FDA 11 months to give the OK. That was a large streamlining of their normal processes, but not a meaningful ba…

On the flip side, you have a sizable portion of the population that feels even the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the FDA was rushed (To be clear, I'm playing the Devil's Advocate here - I personally don't disagree with the FDA's decisions, and got my own shot weeks ago) Genuine Q: which steps of the process do you see as superfluous? Pfizer announced the end of the phase 3 trials on November 18th, they submitt…

It didn't take 11 months for the FDA to give the OK. It took 11 months to design a vaccine from scratch, conduct phase I safety trials, phase 2 human safety and dosage trials, and a phase 3 trial to determine efficacy.

The standards for the phase 1-3 trials are largely set by the FDA. Further, the whole idea that I can't weigh my own risks, and sign a paper saying "I acknowledge that this treatment is not fully tested, and choose to take my chances" is driven by the FDA. So yes, the time span before the public had access was driven by the FDA.

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#119

Post by CWuestefeld » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 9:34 PM UTC

randcraw wrote: post #93

CWuestefeld wrote: post #56

This is how the FDA's refusal to balance up-side risk is going to damage all of us. They're only interested in minimizing the risk from a treatment itself, and pay little to no attention to the risk from not having any treatment. It's been a full year since the first vaccines were formulated, and it took the FDA 11 months to give the OK. That was a large streamlining of their normal processes, but not a meaningful ba…

You seem to be arguing that if FDA had begun widespread inoculation earlier with the current vaccines, variant COVID strains would not have arisen. But that's wrong on several levels. Even if we had started producing vaccine en-masse in March, it would still take many more months (several years) to inoculate everyone on the planet. These novel strains would still have arisen within that time frame. We would also have…

You seem to be arguing that if FDA had begun widespread inoculation earlier with the current vaccines, variant COVID strains would not have arisen.

My statement isn't quite that strong. It MAY NOT have arisen; it's all probabilities. Every time the virus is passed to another person, there's another opportunity for a mutation. If we could have driven the infection rate down sooner via vaccine, then there's some chance that it wouldn't have happened.

Assuming ad arguendo that the new S. African strain is able to skirt the vaccines that are being distributed in America, what do we do? Wait another 11 months for a new formulation to be approved, and potentially for yet another slippery variant to arise? How do we get off that treadmill?

Re: SARS-CoV-2 501Y.V2 escapes neutralization by South African COVID-19 donor plasma

#120

Post by dang » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 9:51 PM UTC

towhom wrote: post #117

dang wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please stop repeating this. Repetition is tedious and lowers signal/noise ratio. HN is supposed to be for curiosity, and curiosity wants just the opposite. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... Edit: also, can you please stop posting unsubstantive comments generally? It looks like you've been doing that a lot, and that's not what HN is for, fo…

What exactly is the problem with saying wearing masks is going to help us get out of this?

The issue is that repeating the same thing over and over is not cool. If the account hadn't posted it three times in a row I wouldn't have replied.

Since you ask, though: a comment saying "wearing masks is going to help us get out of this" and not adding anything interesting would be a bad HN comment. A good comment would add some information or new insight. Simply repeating what we've all heard a million times does nothing for curiosity.