Abstract
Viral populations in natural infections can have a high degree of sequence diversity, which can directly impact immune escape. However, antibody potency is often tested in vitro with a relatively clonal viral populations, such as laboratory virus or pseudotyped virus stocks, which may not accurately represent the genetic diversity of circulating viral genotypes. This can affect the validity of viral phenotype assays, such as antibody neutralization assays. To address this issue, we tested whether recombinant virus carrying SARS-CoV-2 spike (VSV-SARS-CoV-2-S) stocks could be made more genetically diverse by passage, and if a stock passaged under selective pressure was more capable of escaping monoclonal antibody (mAb) neutralization than unpassaged stock or than viral stock passaged without selective pressures. We passaged VSV-SARS-CoV-2-S four times concurrently in three cell lines and then six times with or without polyclonal antiserum selection pressure. All three of the monoclonal antibodies tested neutralized the viral population present in the unpassaged stock. The viral inoculum derived from serial passage without antiserum selection pressure was neutralized by two of the three mAbs. However, the viral inoculum derived from serial passage under antiserum selection pressure escaped neutralization by all three mAbs. Deep sequencing revealed the rapid acquisition of multiple mutations associated with antibody escape in the VSV-SARS-CoV-2-S that had been passaged in the presence of antiserum, including key mutations present in currently circulating Omicron subvariants. These data indicate that viral stock that was generated under polyclonal antiserum selection pressure better reflects the natural environment of the circulating virus and may yield more biologically relevant outcomes in phenotypic assays. Thus, mAb assessment assays that utilize a more genetically diverse, biologically relevant, virus stock may yield data that are relevant for prediction of mAb efficacy and for enhancing biosurveillance.
Funder
U.S. Department of Energy
Department of Energy, Office of Science
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)