[gewa]

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 (Fig.2b). These data revealed that binding of polyclonal plasma to 501Y.V2 RBD+SBD1 was only substantially affected in a minority of cases (14 of 44 with ≥five-fold reduction, 32%). Most of the convalescent plasma/serum suffered less than four-fold reductions in total binding activity (as measured by area under the curve), suggesting a considerable non-neutralizing antibody component are still able to bind the 501Y.V2 spike antigen"

Its also worth to note that only 44 plasma samples were used from individuals out of a population where the virus probably originated.

[chemeng]

Looks like this was posted again, so I'll post my response here as well:

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, it is the neutralization potency that strongly correlates with disease severity.

[timr]

Everything you've written is speculation or assertion, whereas the OP's comment is a factual statement about the limitation of the work. They're showing that this mutation escapes a few particular antibodies. That's all.

At the very least, the current headline "strongly resistant to past immunity" is editorialized and completely misleading, and should be changed to the title of the paper.

> In many cases, binding antibodies increase cell infectivity.

Citation absolutely required. I am unaware of an example of this, let alone "many cases".

[chemeng]

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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009286742...)

[timr]

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 paper here is not showing that. As the OP noted, the concerning result is limited to a few examples of monoclonal antibodies. The human immune response is much more complicated.

[chemeng]

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.

[timr]

> 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.