Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron sublineages BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5 exhibit higher transmissibility than the BA.2 lineage1. The receptor binding and immune-evasion capability of these recently emerged variants require immediate investigation. Here, coupled with structural comparisons of the spike proteins, we show that BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5 (BA.4 and BA.5 are hereafter referred collectively to as BA.4/BA.5) exhibit similar binding affinities to BA.2 for the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor. Of note, BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 display increased evasion of neutralizing antibodies compared with BA.2 against plasma from triple-vaccinated individuals or from individuals who developed a BA.1 infection after vaccination. To delineate the underlying antibody-evasion mechanism, we determined the escape mutation profiles2, epitope distribution3 and Omicron-neutralization efficiency of 1,640 neutralizing antibodies directed against the receptor-binding domain of the viral spike protein, including 614 antibodies isolated from people who had recovered from BA.1 infection. BA.1 infection after vaccination predominantly recalls humoral immune memory directed against ancestral (hereafter referred to as wild-type (WT)) SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The resulting elicited antibodies could neutralize both WT SARS-CoV-2 and BA.1 and are enriched on epitopes on spike that do not bind ACE2. However, most of these cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies are evaded by spike mutants L452Q, L452R and F486V. BA.1 infection can also induce new clones of BA.1-specific antibodies that potently neutralize BA.1. Nevertheless, these neutralizing antibodies are largely evaded by BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 owing to D405N and F486V mutations, and react weakly to pre-Omicron variants, exhibiting narrow neutralization breadths. The therapeutic neutralizing antibodies bebtelovimab4 and cilgavimab5 can effectively neutralize BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5, whereas the S371F, D405N and R408S mutations undermine most broadly sarbecovirus-neutralizing antibodies. Together, our results indicate that Omicron may evolve mutations to evade the humoral immunity elicited by BA.1 infection, suggesting that BA.1-derived vaccine boosters may not achieve broad-spectrum protection against new Omicron variants.

This is a PDF file of a peer-reviewed paper that has been accepted for publication. Although unedited, the content has been subjected to preliminary formatting. Nature is providing this early version of the typeset paper as a service to our authors and readers. The text and figures will undergo copyediting and a proof review before the paper is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Recent emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages BA.2.12.1, BA.2.13, BA.4 and BA.5 all contain L452 mutations and show potential higher transmissibility over BA.2. The new variants' receptor binding and immune evasion capability require immediate investigation, especially on the role of L452 substitutions. Herein, coupled with structural comparisons, we showed that BA.2 sublineages, including BA.2.12.1 and BA.2.13, exhibit increased ACE2-binding affinities compared to BA.1; while BA.4/BA.5 shows the weakest receptor-binding activity due to F486V and R493Q reversion. Importantly, compared to BA.2, BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 exhibit stronger neutralization escape from the plasma of 3-dose vaccinees and, most strikingly, from vaccinated BA.1 convalescents. To delineate the underlying evasion mechanism, we determined the escaping mutation profiles, epitope distribution and Omicron sublineage neutralization efficacy of 1640 RBD-directed neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), including 614 isolated from BA.1 convalescents. Interestingly, post-vaccination BA.1 infection mainly recalls wildtype (WT) induced humoral memory and elicits antibodies that neutralize both WT and BA.1. These cross-reactive NAbs are significantly enriched on non-ACE2-competing epitopes; and surprisingly, the majority are undermined by R346 and L452 substitutions, namely R346K (BA.1.1), L452M (BA.2.13), L452Q (BA.2.12.1) and L452R (BA.4/BA.5), suggesting that R346K and L452 mutations appeared under the immune pressure of Omicron convalescents. Nevertheless, BA.1 infection can also induce new clones of BA.1-specific antibodies that potently neutralize BA.1 but do not respond to WT SARS-CoV-2, due to the high susceptibility to N501, N440, K417 and E484. However, these NAbs are largely escaped by BA.2 sublineages and BA.4/BA.5 due to D405N and F486V, exhibiting poor neutralization breadths. As for therapeutic NAbs, LY-CoV1404 (Bebtelovimab) and COV2-2130 (Cilgavimab) can still effectively neutralize BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5, while the S371F, D405N and R408S mutations carried by BA.2/BA.4/BA.5 sublineages would undermine most broad sarbecovirus NAbs. Together, our results indicate that Omicron can evolve mutations to specifically evade humoral immunity elicited by BA.1 infection. The continuous evolution of Omicron poses great challenges to SARS-CoV-2 herd immunity and suggests that BA.1-derived vaccine boosters may not be ideal for achieving broad-spectrum protection.