2021
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btab094
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differentially conserved amino acid positions may reflect differences in SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV behaviour

Abstract: Motivation SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus currently causing a pandemic. Here, we performed a combined in-silico and cell culture comparison of SARS-CoV-2 and the closely related SARS-CoV. Results Many amino acid positions are differentially conserved between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV, which reflects the discrepancies in virus behaviour, i.e. more effective human-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and higher mortality associ… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
1
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The human colon carcinoma Caco-2 cell line was established by Jorgen Fogh (Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York) in 1974 [Fogh et al, 1977] and has been used for the cultivation of human pathogenic viruses including influenza viruses and coronaviruses since 1985 [Reigel, 1985; Collins, 1990; Chan et al, 2013a]. We already used Caco-2 cells (obtained from DSMZ, Braunschweig, Germany) for the cultivation of the close SARS-CoV-2 relative SARS-CoV starting in 2003 [Cinatl et al, 2003; Cinatl et al, 2004] and they also enabled us and others to quickly cultivate SARS-CoV-2 isolates when this novel virus emerged [Bojkova et al, 2020; Bojkova et al, 2020a; Bojkova et al, 2020b; Hoehl et al, 2020; Klann et al, 2020; Toptan et al, 2020; Bojkova et al, 2021; Ellinger et al, 2021; Gower et al, 2021; Widera et al, 2021].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The human colon carcinoma Caco-2 cell line was established by Jorgen Fogh (Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York) in 1974 [Fogh et al, 1977] and has been used for the cultivation of human pathogenic viruses including influenza viruses and coronaviruses since 1985 [Reigel, 1985; Collins, 1990; Chan et al, 2013a]. We already used Caco-2 cells (obtained from DSMZ, Braunschweig, Germany) for the cultivation of the close SARS-CoV-2 relative SARS-CoV starting in 2003 [Cinatl et al, 2003; Cinatl et al, 2004] and they also enabled us and others to quickly cultivate SARS-CoV-2 isolates when this novel virus emerged [Bojkova et al, 2020; Bojkova et al, 2020a; Bojkova et al, 2020b; Hoehl et al, 2020; Klann et al, 2020; Toptan et al, 2020; Bojkova et al, 2021; Ellinger et al, 2021; Gower et al, 2021; Widera et al, 2021].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our hands, Caco-2 cells (obtained from DSMZ, Braunschweig, Germany at the time) have been highly permissive to SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 and developed a pronounced cytopathogenic effect (CPE) in response to infection with both viruses [Cinatl et al, 2003; Cinatl et al, 2004; Bojkova et al, 2020b; Bojkova et al, 2021]. In other studies, however, Caco-2 cells displayed low SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and no CPE formation [Chu et al, 2020; Lee et al, 2020; Yeung et al, 2021].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We believe that this hypothesis is unlikely, as it would imply that viral particles are able to cross endothelial cells, basement membranes, and interstitial spaces in the lung before finally reaching alveolar epithelial cells. Although the ACE2 receptor is expressed by diverse cells from several organs, the level of expression of ACE2 in a given cell type is not a reliable predictor of the susceptibility of that cell to SARS-CoV-2 infection (Oritz et al 2020 ; Bojkova et al 2021 ). Even in the worst-case scenario of a cornea transplant from an asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2—positive donor, the available evidence and the results presented herein suggest that the risk of a transplant recipient developing a respiratory infection typical of COVID-19 appears to be very low.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4A ) ( 288 , 289 ). In Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells, camostat inhibits SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 with EC 50 s generally below 1 μM, while the EC 50 s for nafamostat are generally ∼10-fold lower ( 130 , 287 , 290 , 291 ). These compounds, however, are largely inactive in Vero cells because Vero cells do not require TMPRSS2 for virus entry ( 63 , 131 , 287 ).…”
Section: Host-targeting Compoundsmentioning
confidence: 99%