Key result
Merafloxacin inhibited SARS-CoV-2 -1 programmed ribosomal frameshifting and impeded viral replication in Vero E6 cells with an EC50 of 2.6 μM.
Why the study?
The extent to which SARS-CoV-2 replication may be sensitive to changes in programmed -1 ribosomal frameshifting (-1 PRF) efficiency was unknown.
Does merafloxacin reduce SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro by inhibiting -1 ribosomal frameshifting?
Does merafloxacin reduce SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro by inhibiting -1 ribosomal frameshifting?
Effect estimate: EC50 2.6 μM
Merafloxacin inhibits -1 ribosomal frameshifting and impedes SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro, providing proof of principle for targeting -1 PRF as an antiviral strategy.
Merafloxacin's in vitro activity does not support clinical use; leaves open whether frameshifting inhibition yields viable antivirals.
Translation of open reading frame 1b (ORF1b) in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) requires programmed -1 ribosomal frameshifting (-1 PRF) promoted by an RNA pseudoknot. The extent to which SARS-CoV-2 replication may be sensitive to changes in -1 PRF efficiency is currently unknown. Through an unbiased, reporter-based high-throughput compound screen, we identified merafloxacin, a fluoroquinolone antibacterial, as a -1 PRF inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2. Frameshift inhibition by merafloxacin is robust to mutations within the pseudoknot region and is similarly effective on -1 PRF of other beta coronaviruses. Importantly, frameshift inhibition by merafloxacin substantially impedes SARS-CoV-2 replication in Vero E6 cells, thereby providing the proof of principle of targeting -1 PRF as an effective antiviral strategy for SARS-CoV-2.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2020) studied SARS-CoV-2. Merafloxacin vs. DMSO control was evaluated on SARS-CoV-2 replication (viral yield) (EC50 2.6 μM). Merafloxacin inhibited SARS-CoV-2 -1 programmed ribosomal frameshifting and impeded viral replication in Vero E6 cells with an EC50 of 2.6 μM.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: