Using structural approaches, the researchers showed that the anti-NTD antibodies that were capable of ADE bind to the spike in a different way to other antibodies. In addition, the anti-RBD and anti-NTD antibodies can also interact simultaneously with the spike, which may modulate neutralising functions against ADE.
Despite this, it is difficult for an anti-NTD antibody, capable of ADE (DH1052), to cancel out the neutralisation capacities of an anti-RBD NAb (DH1041) when they are mixed before in vitro SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although levels of these Abs were comparable in the 21 COVID-19 patients, this suggests that after natural infection, the presence of these 2 types of antibodies in the blood does probably not swing the balance towards ADE.
They then evaluated in vivo the effects of an anti-NTD NAb (DH1050.1), a non-neutralising anti-NTD that was nevertheless capable of ADE (DH1052) and of 4 anti-RBD NAds capable of ADE (DH1041, DH1043, DH1046, DH1047).
In mice, the administration of the DH1052 antibody, prior to infection with SARS-CoV-2, reduced the severity of the illness as well as viral replication in the lungs. DH1041, given alone or in combination with the DH1050.1 antibody, before or after infection, had the same effects. The DH1046 and DH1047 antibodies (which also recognise SARS-CoV) protected mice infected by the WIV1-CoV strain from bats.
In cynomolgus macaques, administration of the DH1052 antibody, before infection with SARS-CoV-2, did not heighten clinical symptoms such as lung inflammation, irrespective of the dose. However, macaques that had received a dose of DH1050.1 showed reduced inflammation. These 2 antibodies both reduce viral replication in the upper and lower respiratory tracts. Similar effects were observed with anti-RBDs. Of the 46 macaques having received antibodies capable of ADE, 3 showed increased signs of inflammation, but only one developed a severe form of the illness, without it being established as to whether the antibody was the cause.