Boston University researches COVID hybrid strain, stirring controversy

Boston University is defending its research after a report studying the COVID-19 omicron variant’s lower severe infection rate was met with criticism among news outlets and one of its financial backers.

BU’s National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories removed an omicron variant spike protein and attached it to a virus of the original COVID strain. This fused virus, as Boston.com reported, was then found to be more lethal than the naturally occurring omicron variant when exposed to lab mice, in contrast to 100% with the original strain.

“The Omicron S-bearing virus robustly escapes vaccine-induced humoral immunity, mainly due to mutations in the receptor-binding motif... while Omicron causes mild, non-fatal infection, the Omicron S-carrying virus inflicts severe disease with a mortality rate of 80%,” the report says.

The findings of the report, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, concluded that mutations of the omicron spike allow the variant to evade any developed immunity and are not the cause of omicron’s lesser severity compared with other variants.

Some headlines have called the research “playing with fire” or alleged that the university has claimed outright that they have developed a lethal COVID strain. Boston University first clarified in a statement that the research was not gain-of-function research, and therefore did not make a more severe version of the omicron variant, instead making “the virus replicate less dangerous.”

• Read more: Mass. gets $25 million for research center to fend off future pandemic

“Secondly, the research was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC), which consists of scientists as well as local community members,” the statement continued. “The Boston Public Health Commission also approved the research. Furthermore, this research mirrors and reinforces the findings of other, similar research performed by other organizations, including the FDA. Ultimately, this research will provide a public benefit by leading to better, targeted therapeutic interventions to help fight against future pandemics.”

“They’ve sensationalized the message, they misrepresent the study and its goals in its entirety,” said Ronald Corley, BU Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine chair of microbiology, when speaking with Boston University research’s news website The Brink.

The research’s existence has also allegedly caused a rift between BU researchers and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. NIAID helped fund their work, but Director of NIAID’s Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Emily Erbelding told STAT that there was no specific mention of their exact work in the grant application.

“I think we’re going to have conversations over upcoming days,” Erbelding said to STAT.

Researchers said the study was conducted in the lab’s biosafety-level 3 facilities, entering and exiting their workspace through several interlocked doors, according to The Brink. The space is completely sealed and the lab is fitted with proper, sophisticated filtration and decontamination technology.

“We take our safety and security of how we handle pathogens seriously, and the virus does not leave the laboratory in which it’s being studied,” Corley said to The Brink. “Our whole goal is for the public’s health. And this study was part of that, finding what part of the virus is responsible for causing severe disease. If we can understand that, we can then develop the tools that we need to develop better therapeutics.”