Search This Blog

Thursday, August 19, 2021

New SARS-CoV-2 variants have changed the pandemic. What will the virus do next?

 Edward Holmes does not like making predictions, but last year he hazarded a few. Again and again, people had asked Holmes, an expert on viral evolution at the University of Sydney, how he expected SARS-CoV-2 to change. In May 2020, 5 months into the pandemic, he started to include a slide with his best guesses in his talks. The virus would probably evolve to avoid at least some human immunity, he suggested. But it would likely make people less sick over time, he said, and there would be little change in its infectivity. In short, it sounded like evolution would not play a major role in the pandemic’s near future.

“A year on I’ve been proven pretty much wrong on all of it,” Holmes says.

Well, not all: SARS-CoV-2 did evolve to better avoid human antibodies. But it has also become a bit more virulent and a lot more infectious, causing more people to fall ill. That has had an enormous influence on the course of the pandemic.

The Delta strain circulating now—one of four “variants of concern” identified by the World Health Organization, along with four “variants of interest”—is so radically different from the virus that appeared in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 that many countries have been forced to change their pandemic planning. Governments are scrambling to accelerate vaccination programs while prolonging or even reintroducing mask wearing and other public health measures. As to the goal of reaching herd immunity—vaccinating so many people that the virus simply has nowhere to go—“With the emergence of Delta, I realized that it’s just impossible to reach that,” says Müge Çevik, an infectious disease specialist at the University of St. Andrews.

Yet the most tumultuous period in SARS-CoV-2’s evolution may still be ahead of us, says Aris Katzourakis, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Oxford. There’s now enough immunity in the human population to ratchet up an evolutionary competition, pressuring the virus to adapt further. At the same time, much of the world is still overwhelmed with infections, giving the virus plenty of chances to replicate and throw up new mutations.

Predicting where those worrisome factors will lead is just as tricky as it was a year and a half ago, however. “We’re much better at explaining the past than predicting the future,” says Andrew Read, an evolutionary biologist at Pennsylvania State University, University Park. Evolution, after all, is driven by random mutations, which are impossible to predict. “It’s very, very tricky to know what’s possible, until it happens,” Read says. “It’s not physics. It doesn’t happen on a billiard table.”

Still, experience with other viruses gives evolutionary biologists some clues about where SARS-CoV-2 may be headed. The courses of past outbreaks show the coronavirus could well become even more infectious than Delta is now, Read says: “I think there’s every expectation that this virus will continue to adapt to humans and will get better and better at us.” Far from making people less sick, it could also evolve to become even deadlier, as some previous viruses including the 1918 flu have. And although COVID-19 vaccines have held up well so far, history shows the virus could evolve further to elude their protective effect—although a recent study in another coronavirus suggests that could take many years, which would leave more time to adapt vaccines to the changing threat.

Explaining the past

Holmes himself uploaded one of the first SARS-CoV-2 genomes to the internet on 10 January 2020. Since then, more than 2 million genomes have been sequenced and published, painting an exquisitely detailed picture of a changing virus. “I don’t think we’ve ever seen that level of precision in watching an evolutionary process,” Holmes says.

Making sense of the endless stream of mutations is complicated. Each is just a tiny tweak in the instructions for how to make proteins. Which mutations end up spreading depends on how the viruses carrying those tweaked proteins fare in the real world.

The vast majority of mutations give the virus no advantage at all, and identifying the ones that do is difficult. There are obvious candidates, such as mutations that change the part of the spike protein—which sits on the surface of the virus—that binds to human cells. But changes elsewhere in the genome may be just as crucial—yet are harder to interpret. Some genes’ functions aren’t even clear, let alone what a change in their sequence could mean. The impact of any one change on the virus’ fitness also depends on other changes it has already accumulated. That means scientists need real-world data to see which variants appear to be taking off. Only then can they investigate, in cell cultures and animal experiments, what might explain that viral success.

The most eye-popping change in SARS-CoV-2 so far has been its improved ability to spread between humans. At some point early in the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 acquired a mutation called D614G that made it a bit more infectious. That version spread around the world; almost all current viruses are descended from it. Then in late 2020, scientists identified a new variant, now called Alpha, in patients in Kent, U.K., that was about 50% more transmissible. Delta, first seen in India and now conquering the world, is another 40% to 60% more transmissible than Alpha.

Hostile takeovers

SARS-CoV-2 variants began to emerge in 2020. Alpha surged in many countries in early 2021, then was largely replaced by Delta. Two other variants of concern, Beta and Gamma, account for a smaller number of cases.

DeltaAlphaBetaGammaAug. 2020Oct. 2020Dec. 2020Feb. 2021Apr. 2021Jun. 2021Aug. 2021020406080100%
(GRAPHIC) N. DESAI/SCIENCE; (DATA) NEXTSTRAIN; GISAID

Read says the pattern is no surprise. “The only way you could not get infectiousness rising would be if the virus popped into humans as perfect at infecting humans as it could be, and the chance of that happening is incredibly small,” he says. But Holmes was startled. “This virus has gone up three notches in effectively a year and that, I think, was the biggest surprise to me,” Holmes says. “I didn’t quite appreciate how much further the virus could get.”

Bette Korber at Los Alamos National Laboratory and her colleagues first suggested that D614G, the early mutation, was taking over because it made the virus better at spreading. She says skepticism about the virus’ ability to evolve was common in the early days of the pandemic, with some researchers saying D614G’s apparent advantage might be sheer luck. “There was extraordinary resistance in the scientific community to the idea this virus could evolve as the pandemic grew in seriousness in spring of 2020,” Korber says.

Researchers had never watched a completely novel virus spread so widely and evolve in humans, after all. “We’re used to dealing with pathogens that have been in humanity for centuries, and their evolutionary course is set in the context of having been a human pathogen for many, many years,” says Jeremy Farrar, head of the Wellcome Trust. Katzourakis agrees. “This may have affected our priors and conditioned many to think in a particular way,” he says.

Another, more practical problem is that real-world advantages for the virus don’t always show up in cell culture or animal models. “There is no way anyone would have noticed anything special about Alpha from laboratory data alone,” says Christian Drosten, a virologist at the Charité University Hospital in Berlin. He and others are still figuring out what, at the molecular level, gives Alpha and Delta an edge.

Alpha seems to bind more strongly to the human ACE2 receptor, the virus’ target on the cell surface, partly because of a mutation in the spike protein called N501Y. It may also be better at countering interferons, molecules that are part of the body’s viral immune defenses. Together those changes may lower the amount of virus needed to infect someone—the infectious dose. In Delta, one of the most important changes may be near the furin cleavage site on spike, where a human enzyme cuts the protein, a key step enabling the virus to invade human cells. A mutation called P681R in that region makes cleavage more efficient, which may allow the virus to enter more cells faster and lead to greater numbers of virus particles in an infected person. In July, Chinese researchers posted a preprint showing Delta could lead to virus levels in patient samples 1000 times higher than for previous variants. Evidence is accumulating that infected people not only spread the virus more efficiently, but also faster, allowing the variant to spread even more rapidly.

Deadly trade-offs

The new variants of SARS-CoV-2 may also cause more severe disease. For example, a study in Scotland found that an infection with Delta was about twice as likely to lead to hospital admission than with Alpha.

It wouldn’t be the first time a newly emerging disease quickly became more serious. The 1918–19 influenza pandemic also appears to have caused more serious illness as time went on, says Lone Simonsen, an epidemiologist at Roskilde University who studies past pandemics. “Our data from Denmark suggests it was six times deadlier in the second wave.”

A popular notion holds that viruses tend to evolve over time to become less dangerous, allowing the host to live longer and spread the virus more widely. But that idea is too simplistic, Holmes says. “The evolution of virulence has proven to be quicksand for evolutionary biologists,” he says. “It’s not a simple thing.”

Two of the best studied examples of viral evolution are myxoma virus and rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus, which were released in Australia in 1960 and 1996, respectively, to decimate populations of European rabbits that were destroying croplands and wreaking ecological havoc. Myxoma virus initially killed more than 99% of infected rabbits, but then less pathogenic strains evolved, likely because the virus was killing many animals before they had a chance to pass it on. (Rabbits also evolved to be less susceptible.) Rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus, by contrast, got more deadly over time, probably because the virus is spread by blow flies feeding on rabbit carcasses, and quicker death accelerated its spread.

The myxoma virus was released in Australia in 1950 to control rabbits after trials at this test site on Wardang Island. It has evolved to become less virulent over time, but not all viruses do.

 
NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF AUSTRALIA

Other factors loosen the constraints on deadliness. For example, a virus variant that can outgrow other variants within a host can end up dominating even if it makes the host sicker and reduces the likelihood of transmission. And an assumption about human respiratory diseases may not always hold: that a milder virus—one that doesn’t make you crawl into bed, say—might allow an infected person to spread the virus further. In SARS-CoV-2, most transmission happens early on, when the virus is replicating in the upper airways, whereas serious disease, if it develops, comes later, when the virus infects the lower airways. As a result, a variant that makes the host sicker might spread just as fast as before.

Evasive measures

From the start of the pandemic, researchers have worried about a third type of viral change, perhaps the most unsettling of all: that SARS-CoV-2 might evolve to evade immunity triggered by natural infections or vaccines. Already, several variants have emerged sporting changes in the surface of the spike protein that make it less easily recognized by antibodies. But although news of these variants has caused widespread fear, their impact has so far been limited.

Viral cartography

On this “antigenic map,” produced by Derek Smith, David Montefiori, and colleagues, the distance between two variants indicates how well antibodies against one neutralize the other.

AlphaWuhan strainGammaBetaKappaEtaEpsilonDeltaBeta has drifted farthest fromthe strain that emerged in Wuhan, China, in 2019.
(GRAPHIC) N. DESAI/SCIENCE; (DATA) DEREK SMITH/UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE; DAVID MONTEFIORI/DUKE UNIVERSITY

Derek Smith, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Cambridge, has worked for decades on visualizing immune evasion in the influenza virus in so-called antigenic maps. The farther apart two variants are on Smith’s maps, the less well antibodies against one virus protect against the other. In a recently published preprint, Smith’s group, together with David Montefiori’s group at Duke University, has applied the approach to mapping the most important variants of SARS-CoV-2 (see graphic, right).

The new maps place the Alpha variant very close to the original Wuhan virus, which means antibodies against one still neutralize the other. The Delta variant, however, has drifted farther away, even though it doesn’t completely evade immunity. “It’s not an immune escape in the way people think of an escape in slightly cartoonish terms,” Katzourakis says. But Delta is slightly more likely to infect fully vaccinated people than previous variants. “It shows the possible beginning of a trajectory and that’s what worries me,” Katzourakis says.

Other variants have evolved more antigenic distance from the original virus than Delta. Beta, which first appeared in South Africa, has traveled the farthest on the map, although natural or vaccine-induced immunity still largely protects against it. And Beta’s attempts to get away may come at a price, as Delta has outstripped it worldwide. “It’s probably the case that when a virus changes to escape immunity, it loses other aspects of its fitness,” Smith says.

The map shows that for now, the virus is not moving in any particular direction. If the original Wuhan virus is like a town on Smith’s map, the virus has been taking local trains to explore the surrounding area, but it has not traveled to the next city—not yet.

Predicting the future

Although it’s impossible to predict exactly how infectiousness, virulence, and immune evasion will develop in the coming months, some of the factors that will influence the virus’ trajectory are clear.

One is the immunity that is now rapidly building in the human population. On one hand, immunity reduces the likelihood of people getting infected, and may hamper viral replication even when they are. “That means there will be fewer mutations emerging if we vaccinate more people,” Çevik says. On the other hand, any immune escape variant now has a huge advantage over other variants.

In fact, the world is probably at a tipping point, Holmes says: With more than 2 billion people having received at least one vaccine dose and hundreds of millions more having recovered from COVID-19, variants that evade immunity may now have a bigger leg up than those that are more infectious. Something similar appears to have happened when a new H1N1 influenza strain emerged in 2009 and caused a pandemic, says Katia Kölle, an evolutionary biologist at Emory University. A 2015 paper found that changes in the virus in the first 2 years appeared to make the virus more adept at human-to-human transmission, whereas changes after 2011 were mostly to avoid human immunity.

It may already be getting harder for SARS-CoV-2 to make big gains in infectiousness. “There are some fundamental limits to exactly how good a virus can get at transmitting and at some point SARS-CoV-2 will hit that plateau,” says Jesse Bloom, an evolutionary biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. “I think it’s very hard to say if this is already where we are, or is it still going to happen.” Evolutionary virologist Kristian Andersen of Scripps Research guesses the virus still has space to evolve greater transmissibility. “The known limit in the viral universe is measles, which is about three times more transmissible than what we have now with Delta,” he says.

Scratching the surface

Researchers trying to understand which genetic changes make SARS-CoV-2 variants more successful have focused on the spike protein, which studs the viral surface and binds to human cells. Alpha, Beta, and Delta have mutations in three key areas of the protein that may affect the virus’ infectiousness and its ability to elude the immune system.

Spike proteinMutation sitesFurin cleavage siteDeltaBetaSARS-CoV-2AlphaReceptor-binding domainN-terminal domain
(GRAPHIC) N. DESAI/SCIENCE; (DATA) E. WALL ET AL.THE LANCET, 397:10292, 2331 (2021)

The limits of immune escape are equally uncertain. Smith’s antigenic maps show the space the virus has explored so far. But can it go much farther? If the variants on the map are like towns, then where are the country’s natural boundaries—where does the ocean start? A crucial clue will be where the next few variants appear on the map, Smith says. Beta evolved in one direction away from the original virus and Delta in another. “It’s too soon to say this now, but we might be heading for a world where there are two serotypes of this virus that would also both have to be considered in any vaccines,” Drosten says.

Immune escape is so worrying because it could force humanity to update its vaccines continually, as happens for flu. Yet the vaccines against many other diseases—measles, polio, and yellow fever, for example—have remained effective for decades without updates, even in the rare cases where immune-evading variants appeared. “There was big alarm around 2000 that maybe we’d need to replace the hepatitis B vaccines,” because an escape variant had popped up, Read says. But the variant has not spread around the world: It is able to infect close contacts of an infected person, but then peters out. The virus apparently faces a trade-off between transmissibility and immune escape. Such trade-offs likely exist for SARS-CoV-2 as well.

Some clues about SARS-CoV-2’s future path may come from coronaviruses with a much longer history in humans: those that cause common colds. Some are known to reinfect people, but until recently it was unclear whether that’s because immunity in recovered people wanes, or because the virus changes its surface to evade immunity. In a study published in April in PLOS Pathogens, Bloom and other researchers compared the ability of human sera taken at different times in the past decades to block virus isolated at the same time or later. They showed that the samples could neutralize strains of a coronavirus named 229E isolated around the same time, but weren’t always effective against virus from 10 years or more later. The virus had evidently evolved to evade human immunity, but it had taken 10 years or more.

“Immune escape conjures this catastrophic failure of immunity when it is really immune erosion,” Bloom says. “Right now it seems like SARS-CoV-2, at least in terms of antibody escape, is actually behaving a lot like coronavirus 229E.”

Others are probing SARS-CoV-2 itself. In a preprint published this month, researchers tinkered with the virus to learn how much it has to change to evade the antibodies generated in vaccine recipients and recovered patients. They found that it took 20 changes to the spike protein to escape current antibody responses almost completely. That means the bar for complete escape is high, says one of the authors, virologist Paul Bieniasz of Rockefeller University. “But it’s very difficult to look into a crystal ball and say whether that is going to be easy for the virus to acquire or not,” he says.

“It seems plausible that true immune escape is hard,” concludes William Hanage of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “However, the counterargument is that natural selection is a hell of a problem solver and the virus is only beginning to experience real pressure to evade immunity.”

And the virus has tricks up its sleeve. Coronaviruses are good at recombining, for instance, which could allow new variants to emerge suddenly by combining the genomes—and the properties—of two different variants. In pigs, recombination of a coronavirus named porcine epidemic diarrhea virus with attenuated vaccine strains of another coronavirus has led to more virulent variants of PEDV. “Given the biology of these viruses, recombination may well factor into the continuing evolution of SARS-CoV-2,” Korber says.

Given all that uncertainty, it’s worrisome that humanity hasn’t done a great job of limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2, says Eugene Koonin, a researcher at the U.S. National Center for Biotechnology Information. Some dangerous variants may only be possible if the virus hits on a very rare, winning combination of mutations, he says. It might have to replicate an astronomical number of times to get there. “But with all these millions of infected people, it may very well find that combination.”

Indeed, Katzourakis adds, the past 20 months are a warning to never underestimate viral evolution. “Many still see Alpha and Delta as being as bad as things are ever going to get,” he says. “It would be wise to consider them as steps on a possible trajectory that may challenge our public health response further.”

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/08/new-sars-cov-2-variants-have-changed-pandemic-what-will-virus-do-next

Delta’s rise is fuelled by rampant spread from people who 'feel fine'

 People infected with the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 are more likely to spread the virus before developing symptoms than are people infected with earlier versions, suggests a detailed analysis of an outbreak in Guangdong, China1.

“It is just tougher to stop,” says Benjamin Cowling, an epidemiologist at the University of Hong Kong and a co-author of the study, which was posted on a preprint server on 13 August.

Cowling and his colleagues analysed exhaustive test data from 101 people in Guangdong who were infected with Delta between May and June this year, and data from those individuals’ close contacts. They found that, on average, people began having symptoms 5.8 days after infection with Delta — 1.8 days after they first tested positive for viral RNA. That left almost two days for individuals to shed viral RNA before they showed any sign of COVID-19.

A dangerous window

An earlier study2 and an unpublished analysis by Cowling and others estimate that before Delta emerged, individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 took an average of 6.3 days to develop symptoms and 5.5 days to test positive for viral RNA, leaving a narrower window of 0.8 days for oblivious viral shedding.

In the latest work, the researchers also found that those infected with Delta had higher concentrations of viral particles, or viral load, in their bodies than did people infected with the original version of SARS-CoV-2. “Somehow the virus is appearing quicker and in higher amounts,” says Cowling.

As a result, 74% of infections with Delta took place during the presymptomatic phase — a higher proportion than for previous variants. This high rate “helps explain how this variant has been able to outpace both the wild-type virus and other variants to become the dominant strain worldwide”, says Barnaby Young, an infectious-disease clinician at the National Centre for Infectious Diseases in Singapore.

The researchers also calculated Delta’s ‘basic reproduction number’, or R0, which is the average number of people to whom every infected person will spread the virus in a susceptible population. They estimated that Delta has an R0 of 6.4, which is much higher than the R0 of 2–4 estimated for the original version of SARS-CoV-2, says Marm Kilpatrick, an infectious-disease researcher at the University of California, Santa Cruz. “Delta moves a bit faster, but is much more transmissible.”

A small number of study participants experienced ‘breakthrough infections’ with Delta after receiving two doses of an inactivated-virus COVID-19 vaccine. But the vaccine reduced participants’ viral loads at the peak of infection.

Vaccinated individuals were also 65% less likely than unvaccinated individuals to infect someone else, although the estimate was based on a very small sample size. This reduction “is significant and reassuring that COVID-19 vaccines remain effective and a vital part of our response to the pandemic”, says Young.

The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02259-2

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02259-2

Antibodies block specific viruses that cause arthritis, brain infections

 Alphaviruses -- mosquito-borne viruses that can trigger brain infections and arthritis -- may have met their match.

Researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis have identified two antibodies that protect animals from disease caused by alphaviruses. The antibodies worked for every alphavirus tested, meaning they potentially could form the basis of treatments or serve as a template for a universal vaccine.

The findings are published Aug. 19 in the journal Cell.

"In the U.S., the alphavirus we worry most about is chikungunya virus, which can cause debilitating arthritis, but we also do see cases of encephalitis caused by Eastern equine encephalitis virus," said senior author Michael S. Diamond, MD, PhD, the Herbert S. Gasser Professor of Medicine and a professor of molecular microbiology and of pathology & immunology. "Alphaviruses used to be limited to the tropics, but in recent years they've been spreading into new geographic areas. Most are still uncommon, but together they cause millions of infections and a considerable burden of disease, and we don't have specific therapies or vaccines for any of them."

The alphavirus group includes more than 30 species, split into two branches. Viruses such as chikungunya, Mayaro, O'nyong-nyong and Ross River, all of which cause fever, rash and arthritis, historically had been limited to Africa, Asia and Europe. However, beginning in 2013, chikungunya worked its way into the Caribbean and parts of North and South America. The other branch of alphaviruses, found in the Americas, includes Eastern, Western and Venezuelan equine encephalitis viruses and causes brain infections.

Diamond and colleagues previously identified a group of antibodies that neutralize many members of the arthritis-causing branch of the alphavirus group. But those antibodies didn't work against all of the viruses that cause arthritis and failed entirely against the ones that cause brain infections.

To find antibodies that would protect against the whole alphavirus group, Diamond and colleagues -- including co-first authors Arthur S. Kim, PhD, then a graduate student, and Natasha M. Kafai, an MD/PhD student -- screened a set of antibodies produced by two people who had been infected with chikungunya virus. They tested the antibodies against a panel of alphaviruses representing both branches of the group. Two antibodies recognized all of the alphaviruses tested.

Then, they assessed whether the antibodies could prevent arthritis or brain infection in animals. Using mice, they tested each antibody against two alphaviruses that cause arthritis and three that cause brain infections. Both antibodies protected the animals against all of the viruses.

Further experiments showed that the antibodies worked by blocking developing virus particles from exiting one cell en route to infecting another. The antibodies attach to part of a viral protein called E1 that is exposed only during the exiting process. Once the virus has fully formed and detached from the cell, the E1 protein is folded into the virus particle and hidden.

In a related paper being published in the same issue of Cell, James E. Crowe, MD, of Vanderbilt University Medical Center, also reports that antibodies targeting the E1 protein bind to a wide range of alphaviruses, prevent them from exiting cells and protect animals against both arthritis and brain infections. Crowe and Diamond are longtime collaborators, and each contributed to the other's paper.

The two studies start from different points -- Diamond began with a virus that causes arthritis; Crowe started with one that causes brain infections -- but arrive at basically the same conclusion: The E1 protein could be the key to universal protection against alphaviruses.

"If we could figure out how to make a vaccine that targets the E1 protein effectively, it would be a cost-effective way to provide broad protection for people in resource-limited places, which is where most alphavirus infections occur," Diamond said. "It's challenging to make such a vaccine since the target is hidden most of the time. But there are techniques that can be used to make the immune system focus on E1 and generate a good antibody response against it. That's the next step toward creating a universal vaccine."


Story Source:

Materials provided by Washington University School of Medicine. Original written by Tamara Bhandari. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.


Journal Reference:

  1. Arthur S. Kim, Natasha M. Kafai, Emma S. Winkler, Theron C. Gilliland, Emily L. Cottle, James T. Earnest, Prashant N. Jethva, Paulina Kaplonek, Aadit P. Shah, Rachel H. Fong, Edgar Davidson, Ryan J. Malonis, Jose A. Quiroz, Lauren E. Williamson, Lo Vang, Matthias Mack, James E. Crowe, Benjamin J. Doranz, Jonathan R. Lai, Galit Alter, Michael L. Gross, William B. Klimstra, Daved H. Fremont, Michael S. Diamond. Pan-protective anti-alphavirus human antibodies target a conserved E1 protein epitopeCell, 2021; 184 (17): 4414 DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.07.006

Millions of Africans lack basic means to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission

 Millions of people across the African continent are at risk of contracting COVID-19 because of a lack of the most basic public health tools to protect themselves—including the essentials of soap and water.

These measures—known as non-pharmacological public health interventions (NPIs), and including physical distancing or isolation at home to prevent transmission—are among the simplest and least expensive methods to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Yet huge numbers of Africa's roughly 1.4 billion people do not have access to these tools, researchers said.

"Hundreds of millions of people across Africa simply lack means for implementing NPIs to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission," said Dr. Timothy Brewer, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health professor of epidemiology and professor of medicine, and a member of the Division of Infectious Diseases, at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. "These populations urgently need to be prioritized for vaccination to prevent disease and to contain the global pandemic."

The findings—published this month in the peer-reviewed journal Epidemiology & Infection, as "Housing, sanitation and living conditions affecting SARS-CoV-2 prevention interventions in 54 African countries"—are from an international team, led by Brewer and colleagues at the University of Bristol, and including researchers in China, Ethiopia, Mexico, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the U.S.

As of now, COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in some 7.3 million cases and 185,505 deaths across the continent. Globally, nearly 210 million cases and 4.4 million deaths have been reported in more than 200 countries, although total mortality due to COVID-19 may be as high as 7 million deaths. The global COVID-19 case fatality ratio approximates that of the 1918 H1N1 Influenza pandemic.

"SARS-CoV-2 spreads primarily by respiratory droplets generated by coughing, sneezing or talking," Brewer said. "Until effective vaccines are universally available, NPIs are the principal means by which governments prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission in their populations."

In addition to isolation of those infected and contact tracing and quarantine for those exposed, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends physical distancing, masking in  and hand washing as important NPIs that countries should employ for COVID-19 prevention and control. Laboratory-based and  suggest that physical distancing and the wearing of face masks may reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission by at least 80%.

"These findings illustrate the substantial barriers many African households face in keeping safe from SARS-CoV-2 infection because of living conditions that preclude their ability to quarantine, isolate or maintain physical distancing and because of substantial obstacles to handwashing," said Dr. Jody Heymann, a UCLA distinguished professor of public health, public policy, and medicine who serves as director of the Fielding School's WORLD Policy Analysis Center (WORLD). "Crucially, the findings raise the urgency of getting vaccines rapidly to all countries in Africa, which lag far behind, and for addressing the underlying conditions of poverty that place populations at increased risk from respiratory virus outbreaks and pandemics."

Across the 54 countries, approximately 718 million people live in households with more than six individuals at home. Approximately 283 million people live in households where more than three people slept in a single room. An estimated 890 million Africans lack on-site water, while 700 million lack in-home soap/washing facilities.

"The pandemic has exposed structural inequalities in almost all spheres, from health to the economy, security to social protection," said study co-author Yehualashet Mekonen, director of the African Child Observatory Program at the African Child Policy Forum (ACPF). "Girls in the continent have particularly felt its impact with far reaching consequences on their life trajectories including higher risks for early marriage, drop out from school and reduced access to reproductive health services."

The researchers also made the point that despite the structural and resource issues faced by governments in Africa, some nation's responses to COVID have been among the best in the world.

"Unfortunately, impoverished living conditions mean that it is almost impossible for many people in African countries to follow public  advice and protect themselves from the virus," said co-author Dr. David Gordon, with the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom. "European and North American countries need to stop hoarding millions of doses of vaccines that they will never be able to use and make them available to people in Africa."


Explore further

Why population immunity is not a realistic goal in Africa's bid to control COVID-19

More information: Timothy F. Brewer et al, Housing, sanitation and living conditions affecting SARS-CoV-2 prevention interventions in 54 African countries, Epidemiology and Infection (2021). DOI: 10.1017/S0950268821001734
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-08-hundreds-millions-africans-lack-basic.html

Existing drugs that can kill SARS-CoV2 in cells

 Since the beginning of the pandemic, researchers worldwide have been looking for ways to treat COVID-19. And while the COVID-19 vaccines represent the best measure to prevent the disease, therapies for those who do get infected remain in short supply. A new groundbreaking study from U-M reveals several drug contenders already in use for other purposes—including one dietary supplement—that have been shown to block or reduce SARS-CoV2 infection in cells.

The study, published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, uses artificial intelligence-powered image analysis of human cell lines during  with the novel coronavirus. The  were treated with more than 1,400 individual FDA-approved drugs and compounds, either before or after viral infection, and screened, resulting in 17 potential hits. Ten of those hits were newly recognized, with seven identified in previous  repurposing studies, including remdesivir, which is one of the few FDA-approved therapies for COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

"Traditionally, the drug development process takes a decade—and we just don't have a decade," said Jonathan Sexton, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Internal Medicine at the U-M Medical School and one of the senior authors on the paper. "The therapies we discovered are well positioned for phase 2 clinical trials because their safety has already been established."

The team validated the 17 candidate compounds in several types of cells, including stem-cell derived human lung cells in an effort to mimic SARS-CoV2 infection of the respiratory tract. Nine showed anti-viral activity at reasonable doses, including lactoferrin, a protein found in human breastmilk that is also available over the counter as a dietary supplement derived from cow's milk.

"We found lactoferrin had remarkable efficacy for preventing infection, working better than anything else we observed," Sexton said. He adds that early data suggest this efficacy extends even to newer variants of SARS-CoV2, including the highly transmissible Delta variant.

The team is soon launching  of the compound to examine its ability to reduce viral loads and inflammation in patients with SARS-CoV2 infection.

The trials are adding to the list of ongoing studies of promising repurposed drugs. Sexton noted that over the course of the pandemic, other drug repurposing studies have identified different compounds with potential efficacy against SARS-CoV2. "The results seem to be dependent on what cell system is used," he said.

"But there is an emerging consensus around a subset of drugs and those are the ones that have the highest priority for clinical translation. We fully expect that the majority of these won't work in human beings, but we anticipate there are some that will."

A surprising finding about certain drugs and COVID

Remarkably, the U-M study also identified a class of compounds called MEK-inhibitors, typically prescribed to treat cancer, that appear to worsen SARS-CoV2 infection. The finding sheds light on how the virus spreads among cells.

"People going in for chemotherapy are at risk already due to a lowered immune response. We need to investigate whether some of these drugs worsen disease progression," said Sexton.

The next step, he noted, is to use electronic health records to see whether patients on these drugs have worse COVID-19 outcomes.

The work is one of the first major discoveries to come out of the new U-M Center for Drug Repurposing (CDR), which was established in November 2019, just as the pandemic began. The Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR), with partners across campus, launched the Center with the goal of finding potential therapeutics for the thousands of human diseases for which there is no treatment.

"Repurposing existing therapeutic interventions in the clinical setting has many advantages that result in significantly less time from discovery to clinical use, including documented safety profiles, reduced regulatory burden, and substantial cost savings," said George A. Mashour, MD, Ph.D., co-director of MICHR and founder/executive sponsor of the CDR.


Explore further

Scientists identify 160 new drugs that could be repurposed against COVID-19

More information: Carmen Mirabelli et al, Morphological cell profiling of SARS-CoV-2 infection identifies drug repurposing candidates for COVID-19. PNAS (2021). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2105815118
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-08-drugs-sars-cov2-cells.html