Kapusta Karina, McGowan Allyson, Banerjee Santanu, Wang Jing, Kolodziejczyk Wojciech, Leszczynski Jerzy
Department of Chemistry and Physics, Tougaloo College, Tougaloo, MS 39174, USA.
Department of Chemistry, Physics and Atmospheric Sciences, Jackson State University, Jackson, MS 39217, USA.
Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2024 Nov 6;46(11):12550-12573. doi: 10.3390/cimb46110745.
Even though COVID-19 is no longer the primary focus of the global scientific community, its high mutation rate (nearly 30 substitutions per year) poses a threat of a potential comeback. Effective vaccines have been developed and administered to the population, ending the pandemic. Nonetheless, reinfection by newly emerging subvariants, particularly the latest JN.1 strain, remains common. The rapid mutation of this virus demands a fast response from the scientific community in case of an emergency. While the immune escape of earlier variants was extensively investigated, one still needs a comprehensive understanding of how specific mutations, especially in the newest subvariants, influence the antigenic escape of the pathogen. Here, we tested comprehensive in silico approaches to identify methods for fast and accurate prediction of antibody neutralization by various mutants. As a benchmark, we modeled the complexes of the murine antibody 2B04, which neutralizes infection by preventing the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein's association with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE2). Complexes with the wild-type, B.1.1.7 Alpha, and B.1.427/429 Epsilon SARS-CoV-2 variants were used as positive controls, while complexes with the B.1.351 Beta, P.1 Gamma, B.1.617.2 Delta, B.1.617.1 Kappa, BA.1 Omicron, and the newest JN.1 Omicron variants were used as decoys. Three essentially different algorithms were employed: forced placement based on a template, followed by two steps of extended molecular dynamics simulations; protein-protein docking utilizing PIPER (an FFT-based method extended for use with pairwise interaction potentials); and the AlphaFold 3.0 model for complex structure prediction. Homology modeling was used to assess the 3D structure of the newly emerged JN.1 Omicron subvariant, whose crystallographic structure is not yet available in the Protein Database. After a careful comparison of these three approaches, we were able to identify the pros and cons of each method. Protein-protein docking yielded two false-positive results, while manual placement reinforced by molecular dynamics produced one false positive and one false negative. In contrast, AlphaFold resulted in only one doubtful result and a higher overall accuracy-to-time ratio. The reasons for inaccuracies and potential pitfalls of various approaches are carefully explained. In addition to a comparative analysis of methods, some mechanisms of immune escape are elucidated herein. This provides a critical foundation for improving the predictive accuracy of vaccine efficacy against new viral subvariants, introducing accurate methodologies, and pinpointing potential challenges.
尽管新冠病毒不再是全球科学界的主要关注焦点,但其高突变率(每年近30个替换位点)构成了潜在卷土重来的威胁。有效的疫苗已研发出来并接种给民众,疫情得以结束。然而,新出现的亚变体,尤其是最新的JN.1毒株导致的再次感染仍然很常见。这种病毒的快速突变要求科学界在紧急情况下迅速做出反应。虽然对早期变体的免疫逃逸进行了广泛研究,但仍需要全面了解特定突变,尤其是最新亚变体中的突变,如何影响病原体的抗原逃逸。在此,我们测试了多种计算机模拟方法,以确定快速准确预测各种突变体抗体中和作用的方法。作为基准,我们模拟了鼠源抗体2B04的复合物,该抗体通过阻止新冠病毒刺突糖蛋白与血管紧张素转换酶(ACE2)结合来中和感染。与野生型、B.1.1.7 Alpha和B.1.427/429 Epsilon新冠病毒变体的复合物用作阳性对照,而与B.1.351 Beta、P.1 Gamma、B.1.617.2 Delta、B.1.617.1 Kappa、BA.1 Omicron和最新的JN.1 Omicron变体的复合物用作诱饵。采用了三种本质上不同的算法:基于模板的强制放置,随后进行两步扩展分子动力学模拟;利用PIPER(一种基于快速傅里叶变换并扩展用于成对相互作用势的方法)进行蛋白质-蛋白质对接;以及用于复杂结构预测的AlphaFold 3.0模型。同源建模用于评估新出现的JN.1 Omicron亚变体的三维结构,其晶体结构在蛋白质数据库中尚不可用。在对这三种方法进行仔细比较后,我们能够确定每种方法的优缺点。蛋白质-蛋白质对接产生了两个假阳性结果,而通过分子动力学加强的手动放置产生了一个假阳性和一个假阴性。相比之下,AlphaFold只产生了一个可疑结果,且总体准确率与时间比更高。详细解释了各种方法不准确的原因和潜在陷阱。除了对方法进行比较分析外,本文还阐明了一些免疫逃逸机制。这为提高针对新病毒亚变体的疫苗效力预测准确性、引入准确方法以及确定潜在挑战提供了关键基础。