Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Resistance with Monoclonal Antibody Therapy

SARS-CoV-2 resistance mutations emerging with mAb treatment were associated with changes in viral replication kinetics

A total of 94 participants were enrolled in the 7000mg cohort (48 in the treatment arm and 46 in the placebo arm, enrolled between August 2020 and October 2020) and 223 participants were enrolled in the ACTIV-2/A5401 phase 2 bamlanivimab 700mg cohort (111 in the treatment and 112 in placebo arms, enrolled between October 2020 and November 2020). The 7000mg dosing group was halted early due to the results of the BLAZE-1 study showing similar virologic efficacy between the bamlanivimab 7000mg and 700mg groups⁹. Viral sequences were successfully obtained from 207 participants in the 700mg bamlanivimab study and 78 in the 7000mg study from at least 1 respiratory sample with quantitative SARS-CoV-2 measurement ≥2 log₁₀ RNA copies/mL at baseline or during 28 days of follow-up. Primary resistance mutations (L452R, E484K, E484Q, F490S and S494P)^7,12 at ≥20% frequency were not detected in any participants in the 7000mg bamlanivimab study, either at baseline or following the single infusion. In the 700mg bamlanivimab arm, three participants had primary resistance mutations at baseline (one L452R in the setting of B.1.427/429/Epsilon variant infection and two participants with E484K) while the placebo arm had two cases of resistance mutations present at baseline (both L452R in the setting of Epsilon infection, Figure 1). Treatment-emergent mutations at ≥20% frequency (not detected at baseline) were significantly more likely to be detected after bamlanivimab 700mg treatment than placebo (7% vs 0%, P=0.003); E484K was found in 5 of 8 cases of emergent resistance, E484Q in two cases, and S494P in one case (Figure 1b). There were two cases of emerging resistance mutations present only as low frequency variants (<20% frequency): one participant in the placebo arm had an emergent F490S mutation (participant B2_9, Supplemental Figure 1), while one participant in the bamlanivimab 700mg treatment arm had emerging S494P concurrent with an emerging E484K (participant B2_6, Supplemental Figure 1).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1: Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 primary resistance mutations.

(A) Percent of participants harboring primary resistance mutations L452R, E484K, E484Q, F490s and S494P at ≥20% frequency in the bamlanivimab 7000mg and 700 mg treatment and placebo arms at baseline, emergent and at any time-point. Participants without quantifiable viral load at baseline and/or follow-up time points were grouped with those without resistance. P-values were calculated using Fisher’s exact test. * P <0.05, ** P<0.01. (B) Pie-charts showing distribution of baseline and emergent resistance mutations in treatment arm. One participant had E484K at baseline with emerging E484Q mutation.

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 viral loads were measured from NP swabs at days 0, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28 of the trial, and from AN swabs daily at each of the first 14 days and at days 21 and 28. We assessed differences in viral loads in those receiving bamlanivimab 700mg treatment by the presence of emerging resistance. Pre-treatment NP and AN swab viral loads were higher for participants with emerging resistance mutations compared to those with no mutations (emerging vs no mutation viral loads at day 0, NP swab: median 7.6 vs 5.5 log₁₀ copies/mL, P = 0.04; AN swab: median 6.6 vs 4.3 log₁₀ copies/mL, P = 0.02, Table 1). Those with emerging resistance also had persistently elevated NP and AN viral loads throughout the first 14 days after study enrollment (Figure 2). Individuals with emerging resistance were older (emerging vs no mutation: median age 56 vs 45 years, P=0.01) and while not statistically significant, the median duration of symptoms at study entry was modestly shorter in those with emerging resistance compared to those without any mutations (emerging vs no mutations: median 4.5 vs 6.0 days, Table 1). Six of the participants with emerging resistance had samples available for baseline serologies and all were negative for IgG (Supplemental Figure 2). Measurements of bamlanivimab serum concentrations in participants with emerging resistance showed results generally concordant with expected values for the 700mg dose, including for maximal concentrations (Cmax) at the end of infusion and concentrations at day 28 (Supplemental Table 1)¹³. One participant (B2_6) did have a serum concentration at day 28 below the limit of quantitation and an elimination half-life faster than typical.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2: SARS-CoV-2 viral kinetics in the bamlanivimab 700mg treatment arm.

SARS-CoV-2 viral loads from (A) Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs (collected at day 0, 3, 7, 14, 21 and day 28) and (B) from anterior nasal (AN) swabs (collected daily through day 14 followed by day 21 and day 28) plotted against study day. Lines show median viral load. Viral loads between groups were compared at each time point using the Mann-Whitney U tests denoted by asterisks wherever significant. The lower limit of quantification was 2.0 log₁₀ SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/mL while the lower limit of detection was 1.0 log₁₀ copies/mL.

Evidence of dynamic SARS-CoV-2 viral population shifts and differential viral fitness after mAb treatment

We observed that the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 resistance mutations was closely associated with a relatively consistent change in viral load kinetics. This is exemplified in Figure 3 with two examples of viral rebound in participants with emergence of escape variants. In case B2_3, intensive S gene sequencing of virus isolated from the AN swabs revealed the emergence of the E484K resistance mutation on study day 3 as a low frequency variant that rapidly took over as the majority population by the next day (Figure 3A, lower panel) and was associated with a 3.6 log₁₀ increase in AN swab viral loads over the subsequent 4 days to a peak of 7.8 log₁₀ copies/mL on study day 7 before declining. For B2_2, the participant had evidence of baseline E484K mutation and low-frequency E484Q in the NP swab (Figure 3B). The AN swab showed low frequency E484K and Q mutations. After bamlanivimab treatment, there were rapid, dynamic shifts in the viral population in the AN swab sample including both the E484K and Q mutations, with the viral load peaking at 6.8 log₁₀ copies/mL over 8 days concurrent with E484Q becoming the dominant mutation. Among the 8 participants with emerging resistance, the median AN swab viral load increase was 3.3 (range 0.3 - 5.2) log₁₀ RNA copies/mL over a median of 4.5 days (Supplemental Figure 1) and this viral rebound is highlighted in the comparison of median viral loads between those with and without emerging resistance mutations (Figure 2).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3: Evidence of viral rebound and/or slow viral decay coupled with dynamic viral population shift and potential compartmentalization.

Viral RNA from nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs and anterior nasal (AN) swabs were sequenced and results from two example participants from the bamlanivimab 700mg treated group are shown. (A) Participant B2_3 showed emergence of E484K and viral rebound between study days 3 and 7. (B) Participant B2_2 showed emergence of a mixed population of E484K and E484Q viruses along with multiple rebounds and slow viral decay. Alignments of consensus sequences from both compartments show position of primary escape and other consensus-level mutations at each time point. CP denotes cytoplasmic domain, FP fusion peptide, HR1 heptad repeat 1, HR2 heptad repeat 2, NTD N-terminal domain, RBD receptor binding domain, S1 subunit 1, S2 subunit 2, and TM transmembrane domain.

To quantify the replicative fitness of the different strains, we developed a mathematical model and fit it to both viral load data and variant frequency data collected from 6 participants in the treatment arm with either E484K or Q resistance emergence. In this model, we assumed that each variant is initially present and grows or declines exponentially at a constant rate (see Methods) as was consistent with the data (Supplemental Figure 3). We chose the first 8-13 time points for model fitting covering the emergence of the resistance mutations but prior to the eventual viral load declines. We estimated both the initial viral load and the rate of exponential increase or decrease for each variant. From the estimation across the 6 individuals, the wild-type amino acid (i.e., 484E), always declined under treatment, with the exponential rate varying from -0.2 to -3.2 per day (Supplemental Table 2). In contrast, the mutant 484K always increased under mAb treatment, confirming it was a resistant mutant, with an exponential growth rate that varied over a wide range (0.5 to 2.3 per day, Supplemental Figure 3G). The 484Q mutant was found in two participants, including low-frequency E484K and Q present at baseline in the AN swab sample of participant B2_2. We estimated that virus harboring 484Q was more fit than 484K in the setting of antibody treatment and grew at approximately twice the rate of the 484K variant (Supplemental Table 2). In participant B2_5, viral loads in the setting of the 484Q mutant declined, but with a rate much slower than the wildtype 484E, suggesting that it is more fit than 484E in the presence of the mAb or developing host immune responses.

Emergence of additional Spike polymorphisms

In those with emerging bamlanivimab resistance, we next assessed the emergence of additional S gene sequence changes outside of the primary sites of resistance (L452R, E484K, E484Q, F490S and S494P). We found that emergence of additional polymorphisms was common and could be detected in all participants with either baseline or emerging bamlanivimab primary resistance mutations, although most were present at low-frequencies (Figure 4). One emergent polymorphism, Q493R, was detected in B2_7 and has been described as a potential bamlanivimab resistance site¹⁰. Interestingly, a number of polymorphisms were detected at sites distinct from the bamlanivimab site of activity and likely reflect escape from host immune pressures. For example, deletions at amino acid positions 141-143 were detected to emerge in both participants B2_2 and B2_4. These N-terminal domain (NTD) deletions have previously been described in immunosuppressed participants with immune escape and persistent COVID-19^14,15. These deletions have also been detected in the wider pandemic and represent a common site of viral escape against antibody pressure on the NTD¹⁶. A number of emerging polymorphisms were also detected that are also in several variants of concern and postulated to be involved in either immune escape or enhanced receptor binding. These include L5F (PID B2_2, also in B.1.526/Iota), P9L (PID B2_2, also in C.1.2), L18F (PID B2_8, also in B.1.351/Beta, P.1/Gamma), D138Y (in P.1/Gamma), N501Y (ACE-2 binding domain mutation in PID B2_10, also in B.1.1.7/Alpha, B.1.351/Beta, P.1/Gamma), and P681H (furin cleavage site mutation in PID B2_10, also in B.1.1.7/Alpha)^17,18.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4: Heat map showing distribution of Spike polymorphisms from AN swab samples in bamlanivimab 700mg treated participants with emerging primary resistance mutations.

(A) Panel A shows polymorphism in context of near-full length Spike gene. Y-axis shows participants’ ID followed by day of sample collection, while x-axis shows amino-acid positions in Spike gene. Different domains of Spike are shown at the top while color indicates frequency of polymorphisms starting with blue indicating lowest value while red indicates highest value in the scale. (B) Zoomed-in heat-map showing sites which harbors polymorphisms at least one of the samples across different participants. The order of samples is same that in panel A while x-axis denotes amino-acid sites with number indicating position of amino-acids while letter before and after the numbers indicate wild-type and polymorphic amino-acid respectively. SP denotes signal peptide, NTD N-terminal domain, RBD receptor binding domain, RBM Receptor binding domain, S1 subunit 1, S2 subunit 2, and FP fusion peptide.

We used day 7 NP swab sequencing results to compare the rate of polymorphism emergence across the participant groups as AN swab sequencing was performed only for participants with evidence of resistance emergence. We detected no significant differences in the number of emerging polymorphisms between those with emerging resistance, treated participants without resistance and participants who received placebo (Supplemental Figure 4).

Viral rebound during after bamlanivimab resistance emergence is associated with worsened symptoms

To assess the clinical impact of the viral load resurgence seen in those with emerging bamlanivimab resistance mutations, we compared longitudinal symptom scores for bamlanivimab-treated participants with and without emerging resistance mutations. Total symptom scores were calculated based on a 28 day diary completed by the participants for 13 targeted symptoms¹⁹. On an individual-level, higher symptom scores were frequently detected after the emergence of resistance and increase in respiratory tract viral loads (Figure 5A). In the population analysis, there was no significant differences in symptom scores between groups before the emergence of resistance mutations. In participants of the bamlanivimab 700mg treatment arm with emerging resistance mutations, median AN viral load increase began at the time of resistance detection, with significantly higher subsequent viral loads and total symptom scores compared to those in the treatment arm without resistance (Figure 5B).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 5. Worsened COVID-19 symptoms with viral resurgence after emergence of resistance mutations.

(A) Example of increased anterior nasal (AN) viral load and total symptom score trend for one participant, B2_7, with emerging E484K resistance after bamlanivimab 700mg treatment. (B) Median AN viral load (solid line) and total symptom score (dashed line) plotted from the time of resistance emergence to ≥20% of the viral population (day 0) for participants in the bamlanivimab 700mg treatment group with (red) and without (green) emerging resistance mutations. For participants without emerging resistance, day 0 was equivalent to study day 4, which represented the median day of resistance emergence for those with emerging resistance. Symptom score between the emerging resistance and no emerging resistance groups is compared at each day by Mann Whitney U tests. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01.

Study participants and sample collection

The study participants were enrolled in the ACTIV-2/AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) A5401 phase 2 randomized, placebo-controlled trial of bamlanivimab 7000mg and 700mg mAb therapy. Symptomatic adults ≥18 years of age with a documented positive SARS-CoV-2 antigen or nucleic acid test were enrolled if the diagnostic sample was collected ≤7 days prior to study entry and within 10 days of symptom onset. The 7000mg dosing group was halted early due to the results of the BLAZE-1 study showing similar virologic efficacy between the bamlanivimab 7000mg and 700mg groups⁹. A total of 95 participants were randomized in the bamlanivimab 7000mg study and 222 participants were randomized in the 700mg study and received an intervention (one bamlanivimab or placebo intravenous infusion). All participants provided written informed consent. Nasopharyngeal (NP) swab samples were collected by research staff at study days 0, 3, 7, 14 and 28, while anterior nasal (AN) swabs were self-collected by participants daily through study day 14 and at days 21 and 28. Swabs were placed in 3ml of media (RPMI with 2% FBS).

Total symptom scores were calculated based on a 28 day diary completed by the participants for 13 targeted symptoms¹⁹. The targeted symptoms are feeling feverish, cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, sore throat, body pain or muscle pain or aches, fatigue, headache, chills, nasal obstruction or congestion, nasal discharge, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Each symptom is scored daily by the participant as absent (score 0), mild (1) moderate (2) and severe (3).

SARS-CoV-2 viral load testing and S gene next-generation sequencing

SARS-CoV-2 viral load from NP and AN swab samples were quantified using the Abbott m2000 system. SARS-CoV-2 quantitative Laboratory Developed Test (LDT) was developed utilizing open mode functionality on m2000sp/rt (Abbott, Chicago, IL) by using EUA Abbott SARS-CoV-2 qualitative reagents³⁰. Identical extraction and amplification protocols developed for RealTime SARS-CoV-2 qualitative EUA assay were also used for the development of the RealTime SARS-CoV-2 quantitative LDT³¹. In this assay, 2 calibrator levels (3 log₁₀ RNA copies/mL and 6 log₁₀ RNA copies/mL) tested in triplicate were used to generate a calibration curve and 3 control levels (negative, low positive at 3 log₁₀ RNA copies/mL and high positive at 5 log₁₀ RNA copies/mL) were included in each run for quality management. In addition, batches of a matrix-specific control (“external” swab control) with a target of 200 copies per mL were prepared and one unit was included in every run. All controls were monitored using Levy-Jennings plots to monitor inter-run precision. Specimens that were greater than 7 log₁₀ RNA copies/mL were diluted 1:1000 and rerun to obtain an accurate viral load result. The lower limit of quantification was 2.0 log₁₀ SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/mL.

S gene sequencing was performed on NP swab samples at two time points for all participants: baseline (study entry) and the last sample with a viral load (VL) ≥ 2 log₁₀ SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/mL. In participants with evidence of slow viral decay (VL ≥ 2 log₁₀ copies/mL at study day 14) or viral rebound (increase in NP swab VL), we performed S gene sequencing of all NP swab samples with VL ≥ 2 log₁₀ copies/mL. Sequencing of daily AN swab samples was performed for participants with any emerging bamlanivimab resistance mutations detected on NP swab samples. Viral RNA extraction was performed on 1 mL of swab fluid by use of the TRIzol-LS™ Reagent (ThermoFisher), as previously described³². cDNA synthesis was performed using Superscript IV reverse transcriptase (Invitrogen), per the manufacturer’s instructions. Spike gene amplification was performed using a nested PCR strategy with in-house designed primer sets targeting codons 1-814 of Spike. PCR products were pooled, and Illumina library construction was performed using the Nextera XT Library Prep Kit (Illumina). Sequencing was performed on the Illumina MiSeq platform. Raw sequence data were analyzed using PASeq v1.4 (https://www.paseq.org). Briefly, data were quality filtered using Trimmomatic (v0.30), using a Q25/5 bp sliding window and a 70 bp minimum length. Non-viral contamination was filtered out using BBsplit v35.76. Filtered reads were then merged with pear v0.9.6 aligned to the reference sequence using Bowtie2 v2.1.0). Amino acid variants were then called at the codon level using perl code and used for resistance interpretation with a 1% limit of detection.

Detection of Spike mutations

We assessed the presence of previously confirmed bamlanivimab resistance mutations (L452R, E484K, E484Q, F490S, and S494P)^7,12. The detection of resistance mutations down to 1% frequency was performed using Paseq³³. Mutations detected by next-generation sequencing at <20% of the viral population were labelled as “low frequency” variants as they would largely be missed by traditional Sanger sequencing. A minimum average of 500x sequencing coverage per sample was required for variant calling.

Serology

IgG antibodies recognizing SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S), Receptor binding domain (RBD), Nucleocapsid (N) and N terminal domain (NTD) proteins were measured in serum samples using a commercially available multiplex kit (catalog # K15359U) from Meso Scale Diagnostics (MSD, Rockville, MD). Assays were performed according kit instructions. Briefly, plates were treated with MSD Blocker A to prevent non-specific antibody binding. Serum samples were thawed and diluted 1:500 and 1:5000 in MSD diluent. IgG was detected by incubation with MSD SULFO-TAG anti-IgG antibody. Measurements were performed with a MESO Quickplex SQ 120 reader. Three internal serum controls provided by MSD were run with each plate. Pre-pandemic sera from healthy adult donors (n=10; AMSBIO LLC, Cambridge MA 02141) were included as additional negative controls for the assays. Threshold values for antibody titers (S, RBD and N proteins) were provided by MSD and were based on analyses of 200 pre-2019 and 214 COVID+ (PCR-confirmed) COVID-9 patients. The thresholds utilized provide 84%, 71% and 71% sensitivity and 99.5%, 98.5% and 100% specificity for Spike, RBD and N antibody responses, respectively. NTD thresholds were not available.

Pharmacokinetic analysis

Blood samples for quantitation of bamlanivimab serum concentrations were collected pre-dose and at the following times after the end of infusion: 30 minutes, days 14 and 28 and weeks 12 and 24. Pharmacokinetic parameters of interest were maximum concentration (Cmax), elimination half-life and clearance (CL) and were calculated based on the statistical moment theory using the trapezoidal rule and linear regression (WinNonLin, Certara, Princeton, NJ, USA).

Statistical analysis and mathematical modeling

The non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare differences in viral loads between groups. Chi-squared tests and Fisher’s exact tests were used for analyses of proportions. All statistical analyses were performed in GraphPad Prism (Version 9.1.1). Intensive AN swab viral loads and sequences were used for mathematical modeling. The mutational load was calculated by multiplying resistance mutation frequency by the total viral load. In the model, we assumed that the ith variant, V_i, has an initial load V_i,0 and its population size changes exponentially at a constant rate, r_i:

Then, the total viral load at time t, V(t) was calculated as:

The model predicted frequency of each variant was

We estimated the initial load, V_i,0 and the rate of exponential increase/decrease, r_i, from the viral load and viral frequency data fitted simultaneously. Note that in this model, we assumed that the observed mutants were present at the time of antibody infusion or were produced quickly near that time.

To calculate the goodness of fit of the model to the data, we first calculated the residual sum of squares (RSS) between the model predicted viral load and the measured viral load on a logarithmic scale using log10. The log-scale was used because viral loads were measured using PCR and thus the measurement error was multiplicative, making the logarithm the natural scale to use. We then calculated the RSS between model predicted frequencies and measured frequencies for the mutants. The final RSS was calculated as the sum of the two RSS errors: Where k denotes the k^th time point, Y_k and F_i,k denote the measured viral load and the measured frequency for the i^th variant at the k^th time point. All data will be available by request to the AIDS Clinical Trials Group and code will be available upon request to the authors.