In vitro study demonstrates that cleaved angiotensin peptides enhance SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binding to AXL and other host receptors, suggesting a potential role in COVID-19 pathogenesis.
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), utilizes its spike protein to infect host cells. In addition to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and neuropilin-1 (NRP1), AXL acts as a spike protein receptor and mediates infection, especially in respiratory cells with low ACE2 expression. Angiotensin II (1–8) can be cleaved into shorter peptides within the biological system. Antibody-based binding assays showed that angiotensin II causes a two-fold increase in the binding between the spike protein and AXL, but not ACE2 or NRP1. While a longer peptide, angiotensin I (1–10), did not affect the spike–AXL binding, shorter lengths of angiotensin peptides exhibited enhancing effects. The C-terminal deletions of angiotensin II to angiotensin (1–7) or angiotensin (1–6) resulted in peptides with enhanced activity toward spike–AXL binding with a similar capacity as angiotensin II. In contrast, the N-terminal deletions of angiotensin II to angiotensin III (2–8) or angiotensin IV (3–8) as well as the N-terminal deletions of angiotensin (1–7) to angiotensin (2–7) or angiotensin (5–7) produced peptides with a more potent ability to enhance spike–AXL binding (2.7-fold increase with angiotensin IV). When valine was substituted for tyrosine at position 4 in angiotensin II or when tyrosine at position 4 was phosphorylated, spike–AXL binding was increased, suggesting that modifications to tyrosine trigger enhancement. Angiotensin IV also enhances spike protein binding to ACE2 and NRP1. Thus, angiotensin peptides may contribute to COVID-19 pathogenesis by enhancing spike protein binding and thus serve as therapeutic targets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oliveira et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: