key: cord-1049995-d4lrmz7r
authors: Fantini, Jacques; Yahi, Nouara; Colson, Philippe; Chahinian, Henri; La Scola, Bernard; Raoult, Didier
title: The puzzling mutational landscape of the SARS‐2‐variant Omicron
date: 2022-01-19
journal: J Med Virol
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27577
sha: 8abc086a5533a76dd4bbd47d30a249cadd42133e
doc_id: 1049995
cord_uid: d4lrmz7r

The recently emerging SARS‐CoV‐2 variant omicron displays an unusual association of 30 mutations, 3 deletions, and 1 insertion. To analyze the impact of this atypic mutational landscape, we constructed a complete structure of the omicron spike protein. Compared with the delta variant, the receptor‐binding domain (RBD) of omicron has an increased electrostatic surface potential, but a decreased affinity for the ACE‐2 receptor. The N‐terminal domain (NTD) has both a decreased surface potential and a lower affinity for lipid rafts. The omicron variant is predicted to be less fusogenic and thus less pathogenic than delta, due to a geometric reorganization of the S1‐S2 cleavage site. Overall, these virological parameters suggest that omicron does not have a significant infectivity advantage over the delta variant. However, in omicron, neutralizing epitopes are greatly affected, suggesting that current vaccines will probably confer little protection against this variant. In conclusion, the puzzling mutational pattern of the omicron variant combines contradictory properties which may either decrease (virological properties) or increase (immunological escape/facilitation) the transmission of this variant in the human population. This Janus‐like phenotype may explain some conflicting reports on the initial assessment of omicron and provide new insights about the molecular mechanisms controlling its dissemination and pathogenesis worldwide.

that this variant is highly contagious. 8 However, this high transmissibility did not seem to correlate with a clearcut higher affinity of the omicron spike protein for the ACE-2 receptor: some groups reported a moderate increase of the receptor-binding domain (RBD) affinity for ACE-2, 9, 10 whether, in contrast, others reported a decreased affinity. 11, 12 To further complexify the problem, a third group concluded that delta and omicron spike proteins display a similar for ACE-2, due to compensation of mutations that either increase or decrease ACE-2 binding in the case of omicron. 13 Third, in vitro experiments performed with culture cells also gave mixed results. In some cells, the infectivity and replication of the omicron variant were higher than delta, whereas in other cells opposite results were obtained, with delta being clearly more performant than omicron. 14, 15 Moreover, several reports suggest that the omicron variant spike confers impaired cell-cell fusion activity, 14 which may correlate with low pathogenicity. 15 In face of such conflicting results, the aim of the present study was to provide a global in silico analysis of the omicron spike protein. To this end, we used a series of molecular modeling approaches to assess the affinity of the RBD for ACE-2, but also the avidity of the N-terminal domain (NTD) for lipid raft gangliosides. 3, 16 We also studied the electrostatic surface potential of both the RBD and the NTD, a critical parameter that controls the kinetic of interaction of the virus with the host cell membrane. 3 Finally, we analyzed the impact of the delta and omicron mutational profiles on the affinity of neutralizing antibodies directed against the RBD and NTD of each variant.

The mutational pattern of SRAS-CoV-2 variants was extracted as an excel file from the Los Alamos database (https://cov.lanl.gov/ components/sequence/COV/int_sites_tbls.comp).

A complete structure of the spike protein was generated from the original 20B strain (Wuhan + D614G, pdb 7bnm). 17 All gaps in the pdb file were fixed by inserting the missing amino acids with Robetta [https://robetta.bakerlab.org/], a protein structure prediction service. 18 The structure was then submitted to several rounds of energy minimization with the Polak-Robière algorithm as described previously. 3 This source file model was used to introduce the specific mutational profiles of delta and omicron with the MUTATE tool of Swiss-PdbViewer. 19 

The electrostatic potential was measured by the Molegro Molecular viewer (http://molexus.io/molegro-molecular-viewer). It is expressed as the sum of the Coulomb potentials for each atom of the protein, with a distance-dependent dielectric constant.

Color intensities (negative in red, positive in blue, neutral in white) were quantified with the ImageJ software as described previously. 3 Values >1 are indicative of an electropositive surface.

The ACE-2 RBD complex used as reference was obtained from pdb The immune-escape index (I-index) is calculated as described in ref. 4 I-index = 1/2 (ΔG wt /ΔG mut (RBD-nAb) + ΔG wt /ΔG mut (NTD-nAb)). The I-index of the original original 20B strain is equal to 1.

Abbreviations: NTD, N-terminal domain; RBD, receptor-binding domain.

The structural model of the NTD bound to lipid raft gangliosides (energy of interaction ΔG = −397 kJ·mol −1 ) was obtained and corrected for gaps as previously described. 3 The avidity of delta and omicron NTDs for lipid raft gangliosides was estimated in comparison with this value after introducing the appropriate mutations in the optimized reference model.

The the host cell membrane. 3 It is calculated with the following formula:

The immuno-escape index (I-index) evaluates the level of resistance of a SARS-CoV-2 variant to neutralizing antibodies (nAb) directed against the RBD and the NTD of the Spike protein. 4 It is calculated according to the following formula:

The scanning electron microscopy image was obtained from a SARS-CoV-2 omicron-RNA-positive VeroE6 cell culture supernatant, 21 using a SU5000 microscope (Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation).

A structural model of the omicron spike protein was generated and compared to the one of the delta variant. In the case of omicron, mutations heavily affected the NTD, the RBD, as well as other critical regions including the proteolytic cleavage site and the fusion machinery ( Figure 1A ,B). The geometric reorganization of the protein around the S1-S2 proteolytic cleavage site of omicron ( Figure 1A ), due to the H655Y/N679K/P681H triad (vs. the single mutation P681R for delta),

suggests that host cell surface proteases such as transmembrane serine protease 2 (TRMPSS2) 22 may not be equally active on both variants.

To learn more about the infectivity and pathogenicity of the omicron variant, we applied to this variant the analysis of the Tindex (transmissibility index) which had allowed us, soon after the appearance of the delta variant in April 2021, to anticipate its expansion globally. 3 This index takes into account the interaction of the NTD domain with the lipid rafts of host cell membranes, 3, 16 the interaction of the RBD domain with the ACE-2 receptor, 23 and the electrostatic surface potential of both NTD and RBD which reveals the kinetics of virus binding to target cells. 3 Taken together, these critical parameters control the very first steps of SARS-CoV-2 infection, from the initial attraction of the viral particle by the cell surface, to ACE-2 binding. 3, 16 Therefore, the T-index adequately reflects the relative infectivity of a SARS-CoV-2 variant compared to any other strain.

In the case of the omicron variant, some of these parameters were increased, but others were decreased when compared with the original 20B strain and to the delta variant. Indeed, the avidity of omicron spike NTD for lipid rafts was decreased by 17%

(ΔG = −329 kJ·mol −1 for omicron vs. −397 kJ·mol −1 for the reference NTD). The affinity of the RBD for ACE-2 was decreased by 23% (ΔG = −264 kJ·mol −1 for omicron vs. −343 kJ·mol −1 for the reference RBD). The electrostatic surface potential of the NTD was decreased by 25% whereas it was increased by 3.8-fold for the RBD (Figure 1C ,D). Based on these parameters, the T-index of the omicron variant was estimated to be 3.90 (Table 1 ). This value is high compared to the Wuhan/D614G strain (2.16), 3 However, other parameters may counterbalance these virological properties. In particular, the immune status of the host might be critical. The mutational pattern of the omicron variant greatly affects the spike surface that faces the host cell ( Figure 1A,B) . Correspondingly, the structural analysis of the omicron spike protein revealed that the main neutralizing epitopes 24, 25 are greatly affected by omicron mutations (Table 1) 

In Marseille, we have already deposited 18 genomes in GISAID as of According to a recent study, it is possible that the spike protein of this variant was subjected to a strong positive selection compatible with host-jumping. 28 Indeed, the mutations in the omicron RBD significantly overlapped with SARS-CoV-2 mutations known to promote adaptation to mouse hosts, particularly through enhanced spike protein binding affinity for mouse ACE-2. Thus, a tentative scenario could be that the ancestor of the omicron virus jumped from humans to mice, accumulated mutations, then jumped back into humans. 28 According to this model, the mutational pattern of the omicron spike protein should not be interpreted as the result of a gradual improvement of SARS-CoV-2 for human host cells, but instead, as a series of compromises required for inter-species back and forth jumps.

In marked contrast with omicron, the delta variant is characterized by a concomitant and convergent evolution of the NTD and the RBD, leading to a remarkable adaptation for their respective targets (lipid raft and ACE-2) on human cell membranes. In this respect, it is interesting to mention that two routes of infection have been characterized for SARS-CoV-2: cell surface fusion, which requires S1-S2 cleavage by TMPRSS2

(route 1), and endocytosis, which is TMPRSS2-independent (route 2). 15 The T-index adequately reflects the first route, as it takes into account the electrostatic surface potential that controls the binding of the virus to the host cell membrane. 3 As expected, delta (T-index >10) is fourfold more efficient than omicron (T-index 3.90) to infect TRMPSS2-rich Calu-3 cells through route 1. 15 On the contrary, omicron is 10 fold more efficient than delta to infect HEK cells which only support endosomal entry of SARS-CoV-2 (route 2). 15 Overall, these data suggest that delta is optimized for fusion at the cell surface, whereas omicron gains entry through endosomal fusion. This specificity of the omicron variant, which is probably due to the geometric reorganization of the S1-S2 cleavage site of its spike protein ( Figure 1A ), is consistent with (i) a lower capacity to fuse infected cells to form syncytia, and (ii) a lower pathogenicity.

The mutations and indels located in the omicron NTD and RBD also dramatically affect key neutralizing epitopes, 24, 25 suggesting that current vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain will confer very little protection against this variant (Table 1 and Figure 2 ). In parallel, the facilitating epitope of the NTD 29-31 is almost destroyed by the 3-amino acid insertion at position 214 (amino acid residues 215-216-217), further underscoring the lack of logic in this exacerbated mutational profile.

However, even in absence of facilitating antibodies, sub-neutralizing antibodies may bind to the virus and mediate its entry into host cells by an Fc receptor-dependent mechanism. 32 Therefore, the neutralizing antibodies elicited upon vaccination may at best not protect against the omicron variant 33 but at worst facilitate its transmission through a classic antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) mechanism. This hypothesis is supported by the high prevalence of omicron contaminations in vaccinated people, e.g. in Norway. 34 target cell type, the omicron variant may be either less or more infectious than delta. Due to an inconsistent distribution of its electrostatic potential and to a defect in the S1-S2 cleavage, omicron is expected to be less pathogenic than delta. Further studies will be necessary to assess whether the ACE-2 receptor polymorphism 36, 37 could allow regional breakthroughs of omicron, especially in immunocompromised individuals.

An important question is whether omicron may increase in prevalence and become predominant in case of decreased incidence of delta as was the case for all previous variants to date a few months after their emergence, most probably because of the accumulation of noxious mutations. 38 A limitation of the present analysis is that it compares a newlyemerging virus to an old one that emerged several months ago. [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] As a matter of fact, despite no clear virological advantage over delta, omicron might increase in prevalence and even become predominant, which has been the fate of all previous variants to date after a few months of circulation due to the accumulation of most often deleterious mutations.

Finally, one should be aware that resistance to infection in the upper respiratory tract could be due preferentially to innate mucosal immunity and could not be assessed by measuring circulating antibodies in the blood that do not have access to these mucosal membranes. 50 

Heavily mutated Omicron variant puts scientists on alert

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant: characteristics and prevention

Structural dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 variants: a health monitoring strategy for anticipating Covid-19 outbreaks

High individual heterogeneity of neutralizing activities against the original strain and nine different variants of SARS-CoV-2

The global epidemic of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant, key spike mutations and immune escape

Rapid automated screening for SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617 lineage variants (Delta/Kappa) through a versatile toolset of qPCR-Based SNP detection

Transmission, infectivity, and antibody neutralization of an emerging SARS-CoV-2 variant in California carrying a L452R spike protein mutation

Epidemiological characterisation of the first 785 SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant cases in Denmark

Omicron: a heavily mutated SARS-CoV-2 variant exhibits stronger binding to ACE2 and potently escape approved COVID-19 therapeutic antibodies

The Omicron variant increases the interactions of SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein with ACE2

Computational analysis of the effect of SARS-CoV-2 variant Omicron Spike protein mutations on dynamics, ACE2 binding and propensity for immune escape

Simulation of the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 shows broad antibody escape, weakened ACE2 binding, and modest increase in furin binding

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant: ACE2 binding, Cryo-EM structure of spike protein-ACE2 complex and antibody evasion

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant shows less efficient replication and fusion activity when compared with delta variant in TMPRSS2-expressed cells

The hypertransmissible SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant exhibits significant antigenic change, vaccine escape and a switch in cell entry mechanism

Leveraging coronavirus binding to gangliosides for innovative vaccine and therapeutic strategies against COVID-19

The effect of the D614G substitution on the structure of the spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2

Protein structure prediction and analysis using the Robetta server

SWISS-MODEL and the Swiss-PdbViewer: an environment for comparative protein modeling

Structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptorbinding domain bound to the ACE2 receptor

Culture of SARS-CoV-2 in a panel of laboratory cell lines, permissivity, and differences in growth profile

SARS-CoV-2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor

Structural basis of receptor recognition by SARS-CoV-2

A neutralizing human antibody binds to the N-terminal domain of the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2

The neutralizing antibody, LY-CoV555, protects against SARS-CoV-2 infection in nonhuman primates

The electrostatic potential of the Omicron variant spike is higher than in delta and delta-plus variants: a hint to higher transmissibility

SARS-CoV-2 variants, spike mutations and immune escape

Evidence for a mouse origin of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant

Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccination?

An infectivity-enhancing site on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targeted by antibodies

In vitro and in vivo functions of SARS-CoV-2 infection-enhancing and neutralizing antibodies

Fc receptors in antibody-dependent enhancement of viral infections

Striking antibody evasion manifested by the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2. bioRxiv

Outbreak caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in Norway

Introduction into the Marseille geographical area of a mild SARS-CoV-2 variant originating from sub-Saharan Africa: an investigational study

ACE2 receptor polymorphism: susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2, hypertension, multi-organ failure, and COVID-19 disease outcome

Comparative genetic analysis of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2) receptor ACE2 in different populations

Effect of deleterious mutationaccumulation on the fitness of RNA bacteriophage MS2

Insights on the mutational landscape of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. bioRxiv: the preprint server for

Another year another variant: COVID 3.0-Omicron

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant: could it be another threat

Omicron: call for updated vaccines

Investigating the aggressiveness of the COVID-19 Omicron variant and suggestions for possible treatment options

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron strain exhibits potent capabilities for immune evasion and viral entrance

Omicron blindspots: why it's hard to track coronavirus variants

Covid-19: Omicron is causing more infections but fewer hospital admissions than delta, South African data show

Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant: unique features and their impact on pre-existing antibodies

High-Technologies Corporation, Tokyo, Japan from 2018 to 2020. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Funding sources had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. 

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8653-5521Philippe Colson http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6285-0308