question
stringlengths
11
145
answer
stringlengths
2
568
context_chunks
sequence
document_id
int64
650
2.63k
id
int64
259
5.31k
context
stringclasses
14 values
Which kit is currently used in China?
kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,643
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
Why were only four studies included?
Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,644
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
Which four studies were included?
Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,645
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is te safety of the vaccines?
All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe,
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,646
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What was the performance of the vaccine candidates?
well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,647
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
How many clinical trials are registered?
nine
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,648
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is the status of the nine trials?
five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,649
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What are the results on seroconversion?
Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,650
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What were the results on antibodies?
Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,651
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What were the T-cell responses?
detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,652
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What were the differences in immune responses?
no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,653
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is the observed benefit of the molecules?
Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,654
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is the ongoing randomized trial investigating?
It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,655
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What are the many prospective and restrospective studies conducted on?
usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,656
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What was the result of the phase 1 trial of IgG immunoglobin?
The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,657
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What role rapid diagnostics plays?
enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,658
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What other measures rapid diagnostics facilitates?
specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,659
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What are ways to perform laboratory diagnostics?
(a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,660
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What are key limtations of genetic detection?
lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,661
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is a key limitation of serological testing?
the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,662
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is the limitation in virus testing?
the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,663
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What was the result of the treatment?
Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,664
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What superiority did the treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment have compared with using control treatment alone?
in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,665
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What was a characteristic of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates?
have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,666
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
How do severe cases compare with mild cases?
viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,667
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is the disadvantage of upper respiratory tract specimens?
hey have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,668
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What are the existing practices in detecting genetic material of viruses?
(a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,669
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
Why are Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis?
it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,670
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
Where was the first validated diagnostic test designed?
in Germany
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,671
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
How were the assays selected ?
based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,672
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
How were the assays used?
Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,673
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What were the results?
All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,674
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What did the trial on SAB-301 demonstrate?
to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.
[ "Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.", "A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review.", "A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia.", "A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline.", "Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV.", "A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.", "However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] .", "More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue.", "Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] .", "The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] .", "Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly.", "With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV.", "The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively.", "There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy.", "We used the key words \"SARS\", \"coronavirus\", \"MERS\", \"2019 Novel coronavirus\", \"Wuhan virus\" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words \"drug\", \"therapy\", \"vaccine\", \"diagnosis\", \"point of care testing\" and \"rapid diagnostic test\" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 .", "Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest.", "For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded.", "Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] .", "Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ).", "With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV.", "The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms.", "It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR.", "RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV.", "Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) .", "Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis.", "These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis.", "Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV.", "In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis.", "Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively.", "There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL.", "• 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA).", "[34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).", "It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review.", "Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] .", "The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] .", "The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] .", "In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ).", "The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] .", "Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) .", "The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study.", "Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60.", "There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus.", "The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] .", "[85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage.", "While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants.", "The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] .", "One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B.", "It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed.", "To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses.", "The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management.", "Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home.", "Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles.", "Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses.", "The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered.", "All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone.", "However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests.", "[46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases.", "MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] .", "The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] .", "Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] .", "These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like.", "had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing.", "Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus).", "The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test.", "It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] .", "Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described.", "However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation.", "Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability.", "Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months.", "Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens.", "Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load.", "Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes.", "Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease.", "This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing).", "Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] .", "The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine.", "The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] .", "(2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.", "There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine.", "Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered.", "Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases.", "Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events.", "Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV.", "Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce.", "Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle.", "The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections.", "Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial.", "There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models.", "Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls.", "The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV.", "Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness.", "Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages.", "Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature.", "This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV.", "Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes.", "Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs.", "Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology.", "Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma.", "Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature.", "Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing.", "Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] .", "Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies.", "While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E.", "A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH.", "It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays.", "The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent.", "Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] .", "Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses.", "Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] .", "The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] .", "Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns.", "The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media.", "Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study.", "This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before.", "Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4" ]
2,486
3,691
Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence. Text: Since mid-December 2019 and as of early February 2020, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating from Wuhan (Hubei Province, China) has infected over 25,000 laboratory-confirmed cases across 28 countries with about 500 deaths (a case-fatality rate of about 2%). More than 90% of the cases and deaths were in China [1] . Based on the initial reported surge of cases in Wuhan, the majority were males with a median age of 55 years and linked to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [2] . Most of the reported cases had similar symptoms at the onset of illness such as fever, cough, and myalgia or fatigue. Most cases developed pneumonia and some severe and even fatal respiratory diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome [3] . The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), a betacoronavirus, forms a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus of the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily [4] . The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) are also betacoronaviruses that are zoonotic in origin and have been linked to potential fatal illness during the outbreaks in 2003 and 2012, respectively [5, 6] . Based on current evidence, pathogenicity for 2019-nCoV is about 3%, which is significantly lower than SARS-CoV (10%) and MERS-CoV (40%) [7] . However, 2019-nCoV has potentially higher transmissibility (R0: 1.4-5.5) than both SARS-CoV (R0: [2] [3] [4] [5] and MERS-CoV (R0: <1) [7] . With the possible expansion of 2019-nCoV globally [8] and the declaration of the 2019-nCoV outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization, there is an urgent need for rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics to detect, prevent and contain 2019-nCoV promptly. There is however currently a lack of understanding of what is available in the early phase of 2019-nCoV outbreak. The systematic review describes and assesses the potential rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for 2019-nCoV, based in part on the developments for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies examining the diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were two independent reviewers each focusing on SARS, MERS, and 2019-nCoV, respectively. A third independent reviewer was engaged to resolve any conflicting article of interest. We used the key words "SARS", "coronavirus", "MERS", "2019 Novel coronavirus", "Wuhan virus" to identify the diseases in the search strategy. The systematic searches for diagnosis, therapeutic drugs and vaccines were carried out independently and the key words "drug", "therapy", "vaccine", "diagnosis", "point of care testing" and "rapid diagnostic test" were used in conjunction with the disease key words for the respective searches. Examples of search strings can be found in Table S1 . We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and validation trials (for diagnostics test) published in English, that measured (a) the sensitivity and/or specificity of a rapid diagnostic test or a point-of-care testing kit, (b) the impact of drug therapy or (c) vaccine efficacy against either of these diseases with no date restriction applied. For the 2019-nCoV, we searched for all in vitro, animal, or human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020, on the same outcomes of interest. In addition, we reviewed the references of retrieved articles in order to identify additional studies or reports not retrieved by the initial searches. Studies that examined the mechanisms of diagnostic tests, drug therapy or vaccine efficacy against SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV were excluded. A Google search for 2019-nCoV diagnostics (as of 6 February 2020; Table S2 ) yielded five webpage links from government and international bodies with official information and guidelines (WHO, Europe CDC, US CDC, US FDA), three webpage links on diagnostic protocols and scientific commentaries, and five webpage links on market news and press releases. Six protocols for diagnostics using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from six countries were published on WHO's website [9] . Google search for 2019-nCoV vaccines yielded 19 relevant articles. With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, real time RT-PCR remains the primary means for diagnosing the new virus strain among the many diagnostic platforms available ( [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] ; Table S3 ). Among the 16 diagnostics studies selected, one study discussed the use of RT-PCR in diagnosing patients with 2019-nCoV [11] ( Table 1 ). The period and type of specimen collected for RT-PCR play an important role in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV. It was found that the respiratory specimens were positive for the virus while serum was negative in the early period. It has also suggested that in the early days of illness, patients have high levels of virus despite the mild symptoms. Apart from the commonly used RT-PCR in diagnosing MERS-CoV, four studies identified various diagnostic methods such as reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), RT-insulated isothermal PCR (RT-iiPCR) and a one-step rRT-PCR assay based on specific TaqMan probes. RT-LAMP has similar sensitivity as real time RT-PCR. It is also highly specific and is used to detect MERS-CoV. It is comparable to the usual diagnostic tests and is rapid, simple and convenient. Likewise, RT-iiPCR and a one-step rRT-PCR assay have also shown similar sensitivity and high specificity for MER-CoV. Lastly, one study focused on the validation of the six commercial real RT-PCR kits, with high accuracy. Although real time RT-PCR is a primary method for diagnosing MERS-CoV, high levels of PCR inhibition may hinder PCR sensitivity (Table 1) . There are eleven studies that focus on SARS-CoV diagnostic testing (Table 1) . These papers described diagnostic methods to detect the virus with the majority of them using molecular testing for diagnosis. Comparison between the molecular test (i.e RT-PCR) and serological test (i.e., ELISA) showed that the molecular test has better sensitivity and specificity. Hence, enhancements to the current molecular test were conducted to improve the diagnosis. Studies looked at using nested PCR to include a pre-amplification step or incorporating N gene as an additional sensitive molecular marker to improve on the sensitivity (Table 1 ). In addition, there are seven potential rapid diagnostic kits (as of 24 January 2020; Table 2 ) available on the market for 2019-nCoV. Six of these are only for research purposes. Only one kit from Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) is approved for use in the clinical setting for rapid diagnosis. Most of the kits are for RT-PCR. There were two kits (BGI, China and Veredus, Singapore) with the capability to detect multiple pathogens using sequencing and microarray technologies, respectively. The limit of detection of the enhanced realtime PCR method was 10 2 -fold higher than the standard real-time PCR assay and 10 7fold higher than conventional PCR methods In the clinical aspect, the enhanced realtime PCR method was able to detect 6 cases of SARS-CoV positive samples that were not confirmed by any other assay [25] • The real time PCR has a threshold sensitivity of 10 genome equivalents per reaction and it has a good reproducibility with the inter-assay coefficients of variation of 1.73 to 2.72%. • 13 specimens from 6 patients were positive with viral load range from 362 to 36,240,000 genome equivalents/mL. The real-time RT-PCR reaction was more sensitive than the nested PCR reaction, as the detection limit for the nested PCR reaction was about 10 3 genome equivalents in the standard cDNA control. [34] Real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp); open reading frame 1a (ORF1a); Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP); enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); immunofluorescent assay (IFA); immunochromatographic test (ICT); nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA). With the emergence of 2019-nCoV, there are about 15 potential vaccine candidates in the pipeline globally (Table 3 ), in which a wide range of technology (such as messenger RNA, DNA-based, nanoparticle, synthetic and modified virus-like particle) was applied. It will likely take about a year for most candidates to start phase 1 clinical trials except for those funded by Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). However, the kit developed by the BGI have passed emergency approval procedure of the National Medical Products Administration, and are currently used in clinical and surveillance centers of China [40] . Of the total of 570 unique studies on 2019-nCoV, SARS CoV or MERS-CoV vaccines screened, only four were eventually included in the review. Most studies on SARS and MERS vaccines were excluded as they were performed in cell or animal models ( Figure 1 ). The four studies included in this review were Phase I clinical trials on SARS or MERS vaccines (Table 4 ) [44] [45] [46] [47] . There were no studies of any population type (cell, animal, human) on the 2019-nCoV at the point of screening. The published clinical trials were mostly done in United States except for one on the SARS vaccine done in China [44] . All vaccine candidates for SARS and MERS were reported to be safe, well-tolerated and able to trigger the relevant and appropriate immune responses in the participants. In addition, we highlight six ongoing Phase I clinical trials identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov register ( [48, 49] ); Table S4 ) [50] [51] [52] . These trials are all testing the safety and immunogenicity of their respective MERS-CoV vaccine candidates but were excluded as there are no results published yet. The trials are projected to complete in December 2020 (two studies in Russia [50, 51] ) and December 2021 (in Germany [52] ). Existing literature search did not return any results on completed 2019-nCoV trials at the time of writing. Among 23 trials found from the systematic review (Table 5) , there are nine clinical trials registered under the clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) for 2019-nCoV therapeutics [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] . Of which five studies on hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir plus ritonavir and arbidol, mesenchymal stem cells, traditional Chinese medicine and glucocorticoid therapy usage have commenced recruitment. The remaining four studies encompass investigation of antivirals, interferon atomization, darunavir and cobicistat, arbidol, and remdesivir usage for 2019-nCoV patients (Table 5) . Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 86% and 94% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively, and was maintained in 79% participants up to study end at week 60. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 50% participants at one or more time points during the study, but only 3% maintained neutralisation activity to end of study. T-cell responses were detected in 71% and 76% participants after 2 and 3 doses, respectively. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks and vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were respectively detected in 77% and 64% participants at week 60. [47] Molecules developed by the university scientists inhibit two coronavirus enzymes and prevent its replication. The discovered drug targets are said to be more than 95% similar to enzyme targets found on the SARS virus. Researchers note that identified drugs may not be available to address the ongoing outbreak but they hope to make it accessible for future outbreaks. [85] Besides the six completed randomized controlled trials (RCT) selected from the systematic review (Table 6) , there is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at SARS therapeutics [92] . The studies found from ClinicalTrials.gov have not been updated since 2013. While many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir or ribavirin only, there has yet to be well-designed clinical trials investigating their usage. Three completed randomized controlled trials were conducted during the SARS epidemic-3 in China, 1 in Taiwan and 2 in Hong Kong [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] . The studies respectively investigated antibiotic usage involving 190 participants, combination of western and Chinese treatment vs. Chinese treatment in 123 participants, integrative Chinese and Western treatment in 49 patients, usage of a specific Chinese medicine in four participants and early use of corticosteroid in 16 participants. Another notable study was an open non-randomized study investigating ribavirin/lopinavir/ritonavir usage in 152 participants [98] . One randomized controlled trial investigating integrative western and Chinese treatment during the SARS epidemic was excluded as it was a Chinese article [94] . There is only one ongoing randomized controlled trial targeted at MERS therapeutics [99] . It investigates the usage of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Interferon Beta 1B. Likewise, many prospective and retrospective cohort studies conducted during the epidemic centered on usage of ribavirin with lopinavir/ritonavir/ribavirin, interferon, and convalescent plasma usage. To date, only one trial has been completed. One phase 1 clinical trial investigating the safety and tolerability of a fully human polyclonal IgG immunoglobulin (SAB-301) was found in available literature [46] . The trial conducted in the United States in 2017 demonstrated SAB-301 to be safe and well-tolerated at single doses. Another trial on MERS therapeutics was found on ClinicalTrials.gov-a phase 2/3 trial in the United States evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity on coadministered MERS-CoV antibodies REGN3048 & REGN3051 [100]. Rapid diagnostics plays an important role in disease and outbreak management. The fast and accurate diagnosis of a specific viral infection enables prompt and accurate public health surveillance, prevention and control measures. Local transmission and clusters can be prevented or delayed by isolation of laboratory-confirmed cases and their close contacts quarantined and monitored at home. Rapid diagnostic also facilitates other specific public health interventions such as closure of high-risk facilities and areas associated with the confirmed cases for prompt infection control and environmental decontamination [11, 101] . Laboratory diagnosis can be performed by: (a) detecting the genetic material of the virus, (b) detecting the antibodies that neutralize the viral particles of interest, (c) detecting the viral epitopes of interest with antibodies (serological testing), or (d) culture and isolation of viable virus particles. The key limitations of genetic material detection are the lack of knowledge of the presence of viable virus, the potential cross-reactivity with non-specific genetic regions and the short timeframe for accurate detection during the acute infection phase. The key limitations of serological testing is the need to collect paired serum samples (in the acute and convalescent phases) from cases under investigation for confirmation to eliminate potential cross-reactivity from non-specific antibodies from past exposure and/or infection by other coronaviruses. The limitation of virus culture and isolation is the long duration and the highly specialized skills required of the technicians to process the samples. All patients recovered. Significantly shorted time from the disease onset to the symptom improvement in treatment (5.10 ± 2.83 days) compared to control group (7.62 ± 2.27 days) (p < 0.05) No significant difference in blood routine improvement, pulmonary chest shadow in chest film improvement and corticosteroid usgae between the 2 groups. However, particularly in the respect of improving clinical symptoms, elevating quality of life, promoting immune function recovery, promoting absorption of pulmonary inflammation, reducing the dosage of cortisteroid and shortening the therapeutic course, treatment with integrative chinese and western medicine treatment had obvious superiority compared with using control treatment alone. Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy participants. [46] Where the biological samples are taken from also play a role in the sensitivity of these tests. For SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, specimens collected from the lower respiratory tract such as sputum and tracheal aspirates have higher and more prolonged levels of viral RNA because of the tropism of the virus. MERS-CoV viral loads are also higher for severe cases and have longer viral shedding compared to mild cases. Although upper respiratory tract specimens such as nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs can be used, they have potentially lower viral loads and may have higher risk of false-negatives among the mild MERS and SARS cases [102, 103] , and likely among the 2019-nCoV cases. The existing practices in detecting genetic material of coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV include (a) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), (b) real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR), (c) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and (d) real-time RT-LAMP [104] . Nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are usually preferred as in the case of MERS-CoV diagnosis as it has the highest sensitivity at the earliest time point in the acute phase of infection [102] . Chinese health authorities have recently posted the full genome of 2019-nCoV in the GenBank and in GISAID portal to facilitate in the detection of the virus [11] . Several laboratory assays have been developed to detect the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, as highlighted in WHO's interim guidance on nCoV laboratory testing of suspected cases. These include protocols from other countries such as Thailand, Japan and China [105] . The first validated diagnostic test was designed in Germany. Corman et al. had initially designed a candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assay based on the SARS or SARS-related coronavirus as it was suggested that circulating virus was SARS-like. Upon the release of the sequence, assays were selected based on the match against 2019-nCoV upon inspection of the sequence alignment. Two assays were used for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) gene and E gene where E gene assay acts as the first-line screening tool and RdRp gene assay as the confirmatory testing. All assays were highly sensitive and specific in that they did not cross-react with other coronavirus and also human clinical samples that contained respiratory viruses [11] . The Hong Kong University used two monoplex assays which were reactive with coronaviruses under the subgenus Sarbecovirus (consisting of 2019-nCoV, SARS-CoV and SARS-like coronavirus). Viral RNA extracted from SARS-CoV can be used as the positive control for the suggested protocol assuming that SARS has been eradicated. It is proposed that the N gene RT-PCR can be used as a screening assay while the Orf1b assay acts as a confirmatory test. However, this protocol has only been evaluated with a panel of controls with the only positive control SARS-CoV RNA. Synthetic oligonucleotide positive control or 2019-nCoV have yet to be tested [106] . The US CDC shared the protocol on the real time RT-PCR assay for the detection of the 2019-nCoV with the primers and probes designed for the universal detection of SARS-like coronavirus and the specific detection of 2019-nCoV. However, the protocol has not been validated on other platforms or chemistries apart from the protocol described. There are some limitations for the assay. Analysts engaged have to be trained and familiar with the testing procedure and result interpretation. False negative results may occur due to insufficient organisms in the specimen resulting from improper collection, transportation or handling. Also, RNA viruses may show substantial genetic variability. This could result in mismatch between the primer and probes with the target sequence which can diminish the assay performance or result in false negative results [107] . Point-of-care test kit can potentially minimize these limitations, which should be highly prioritized for research and development in the next few months. Serological testing such as ELISA, IIFT and neutralization tests are effective in determining the extent of infection, including estimating asymptomatic and attack rate. Compared to the detection of viral genome through molecular methods, serological testing detects antibodies and antigens. There would be a lag period as antibodies specifically targeting the virus would normally appear between 14 and 28 days after the illness onset [108] . Furthermore, studies suggest that low antibody titers in the second week or delayed antibody production could be associated with mortality with a high viral load. Hence, serological diagnoses are likely used when nucleic amplification tests (NAAT) are not available or accessible [102] . Vaccines can prevent and protect against infection and disease occurrence when exposed to the specific pathogen of interest, especially in vulnerable populations who are more prone to severe outcomes. In the context of the current 2019-nCoV outbreak, vaccines will help control and reduce disease transmission by creating herd immunity in addition to protecting healthy individuals from infection. This decreases the effective R0 value of the disease. Nonetheless, there are social, clinical and economic hurdles for vaccine and vaccination programmes, including (a) the willingness of the public to undergo vaccination with a novel vaccine, (b) the side effects and severe adverse reactions of vaccination, (c) the potential difference and/or low efficacy of the vaccine in populations different from the clinical trials' populations and (d) the accessibility of the vaccines to a given population (including the cost and availability of the vaccine). Vaccines against the 2019-nCoV are currently in development and none are in testing (at the time of writing). On 23 January 2020, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced that they will fund vaccine development programmes with Inovio, The University of Queensland and Moderna, Inc respectively, with the aim to test the experimental vaccines clinically in 16 weeks (By June 2020). The vaccine candidates will be developed by the DNA, recombinant and mRNA vaccine platforms from these organizations [109] . Based on the most recent MERS-CoV outbreak, there are already a number of vaccine candidates being developed but most are still in the preclinical testing stage. The vaccines in development include viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, virus-like particles (VLPs)-based vaccine, inactivated whole-virus (IWV) vaccine and live attenuated vaccine. The latest findings for these vaccines arebased on the review by Yong et al. (2019) in August 2019 [110] . As of the date of reporting, there is only one published clinical study on the MERS-CoV vaccine by GeneOne Life Science & Inovio Pharmaceuticals [47] . There was one SARS vaccine trial conducted by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Both Phase I clinical trials reported positive results, but only one has announced plans to proceed to Phase 2 trial [111] . Due to the close genetic relatedness of SARS-CoV (79%) with 2019-nCoV [112] , there may be potential cross-protective effect of using a safe SARS-CoV vaccine while awaiting the 2019-nCoV vaccine. However, this would require small scale phase-by-phase implementation and close monitoring of vaccinees before any large scale implementation. Apart from the timely diagnosis of cases, the achievement of favorable clinical outcomes depends on the timely treatment administered. ACE2 has been reported to be the same cell entry receptor used by 2019-nCoV to infect humans as SARS-CoV [113] . Hence, clinical similarity between the two viruses is expected, particularly in severe cases. In addition, most of those who have died from MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV and 2019-nCoV were advance in age and had underlying health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease that compromised their immune systems [114] . Coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRP), which result in frequent mutations and recombination events. This results in quasispecies diversity that is closely associated with adaptive evolution and the capacity to enhance viral-cell entry to cause disease over time in a specific population at-risk [115] . Since ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the epithelia of the lung and small intestine, coronaviruses are likely to infect the upper respiratory and gastrointestinal tract and this may influence the type of therapeutics against 2019-nCoV, similarly to SAR-CoV. However, in the years following two major coronavirus outbreaks SARS-CoV in 2003 and MERS-CoV in 2012, there remains no consensus on the optimal therapy for either disease [116, 117] . Well-designed clinical trials that provide the gold standard for assessing the therapeutic measures are scarce. No coronavirus protease inhibitors have successfully completed a preclinical development program despite large efforts exploring SARS-CoV inhibitors. The bulk of potential therapeutic strategies remain in the experimental phase, with only a handful crossing the in vitro hurdle. Stronger efforts are required in the research for treatment options for major coronaviruses given their pandemic potential. Effective treatment options are essential to maximize the restoration of affected populations to good health following infections. Clinical trials have commenced in China to identify effective treatments for 2019-nCoV based on the treatment evidence from SARS and MERS. There is currently no effective specific antiviral with high-level evidence; any specific antiviral therapy should be provided in the context of a clinical study/trial. Few treatments have shown real curative action against SARS and MERS and the literature generally describes isolated cases or small case series. Many interferons from the three classes have been tested for their antiviral activities against SARS-CoV both in vitro and in animal models. Interferon β has consistently been shown to be the most active, followed by interferon α. The use of corticosteroids with interferon alfacon-1 (synthetic interferon α) appeared to have improved oxygenation and faster resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in observational studies with untreated controls. Interferon has been used in multiple observational studies to treat SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV patients [116, 117] . Interferons, with or without ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are most likely to be beneficial and are being trialed in China for 2019-nCoV. This drug treatment appears to be the most advanced. Timing of treatment is likely an important factor in effectiveness. A combination of ribavirin and lopinavir/ritonavir was used as a post-exposure prophylaxis in health care workers and may have reduced the risk of infection. Ribavirin alone is unlikely to have substantial antiviral activities at clinically used dosages. Hence, ribavirin with or without corticosteroids and with lopinavir and ritonavir are among the combinations employed. This was the most common agent reported in the available literature. Its efficacy has been assessed in observational studies, retrospective case series, retrospective cohort study, a prospective observational study, a prospective cohort study and randomized controlled trial ranging from seven to 229 participants [117] . Lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra) was the earliest protease inhibitor combination introduced for the treatment of SARS-CoV. Its efficacy was documented in several studies, causing notably lower incidence of adverse outcomes than with ribavirin alone. Combined usage with ribavirin was also associated with lower incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, nosocomial infection and death, amongst other favorable outcomes. Recent in vitro studies have shown another HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir, to have antiviral capacity against SARS-CoV, although it has yet to show favorable outcomes in animal studies [118] . Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, GS-5734) nucleoside analogue in vitro and in vivo data support GS-5734 development as a potential pan-coronavirus antiviral based on results against several coronaviruses (CoVs), including highly pathogenic CoVs and potentially emergent BatCoVs. The use of remdesivir may be a good candidate as an investigational treatment. Improved mortality following receipt of convalescent plasma in various doses was consistently reported in several observational studies involving cases with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. A significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment of 0.25 compared to placebo or no therapy was observed [119] . Studies were however at moderate to high risk of bias given their small sample sizes, allocation of treatment based on the physician's discretion, and the availability of plasma. Factors like concomitant treatment may have also confounded the results. Associations between convalescent plasma and hospital length of stay, viral antibody levels, and viral load respectively were similarly inconsistent across available literature. Convalescent plasma, while promising, is likely not yet feasible, given the limited pool of potential donors and issues of scalability. Monoclonal antibody treatment is progressing. SARS-CoV enters host cells through the binding of their spike (S) protein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD209L [118] . Human monoclonal antibodies to the S protein have been shown to significantly reduce the severity of lung pathology in non-human primates following MERS-CoV infection [120] . Such neutralizing antibodies can be elicited by active or passive immunization using vaccines or convalescent plasma respectively. While such neutralizing antibodies can theoretically be harvested from individuals immunized with vaccines, there is uncertainty over the achievement of therapeutic levels of antibodies. Other therapeutic agents have also been reported. A known antimalarial agent, chloroquine, elicits antiviral effects against multiple viruses including HIV type 1, hepatitis B and HCoV-229E. Chloroquine is also immunomodulatory, capable of suppressing the production and release of factors which mediate the inflammatory complications of viral diseases (tumor necrosis factor and interleukin 6) [121] . It is postulated that chloroquine works by altering ACE2 glycosylation and endosomal pH. Its anti-inflammatory properties may be beneficial for the treatment of SARS. Niclosamide as a known drug used in antihelminthic treatment. The efficacy of niclosamide as an inhibitor of virus replication was proven in several assays. In both immunoblot analysis and immunofluorescence assays, niclosamide treatment was observed to completely inhibit viral antigen synthesis. Reduction of virus yield in infected cells was dose dependent. Niclosamide likely does not interfere in the early stages of virus attachment and entry into cells, nor does it function as a protease inhibitor. Mechanisms of niclosamide activity warrant further investigation [122] . Glycyrrhizin also reportedly inhibits virus adsorption and penetration in the early steps of virus replication. Glycyrrhizin was a significantly potent inhibitor with a low selectivity index when tested against several pathogenic flaviviruses. While preliminary results suggest production of nitrous oxide (which inhibits virus replication) through induction of nitrous oxide synthase, the mechanism of Glycyrrhizin against SARS-CoV remains unclear. The compound also has relatively lower toxicity compared to protease inhibitors like ribavirin [123] . Inhibitory activity was also detected in baicalin [124] , extracted from another herb used in the treatment of SARS in China and Hong Kong. Findings on these compounds are limited to in vitro studies [121] [122] [123] [124] . Due to the rapidly evolving situation of the 2019-nCoV, there will be potential limitations to the systematic review. The systematic review is likely to have publication bias as some developments have yet to be reported while for other developments there is no intention to report publicly (or in scientific platforms) due to confidentiality concerns. However, this may be limited to only a few developments for review as publicity does help in branding to some extent for the company and/or the funder. Furthermore, due to the rapid need to share the status of these developments, there may be reporting bias in some details provided by authors of the scientific articles or commentary articles in traditional media. Lastly, while it is not viable for any form of quality assessment and metaanalysis of the selected articles due to the limited data provided and the heterogeneous style of reporting by different articles, this paper has provided a comprehensive overview of the potential developments of these pharmaceutical interventions during the early phase of the outbreak. This systematic review would be useful for cross-check when the quality assessment and meta-analysis of these developments are performed as a follow-up study. Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are key pharmaceutical interventions to limit transmission of respiratory infectious diseases. Many potential developments on these pharmaceutical interventions for 2019-nCoV are ongoing in the containment phase of this outbreak, potentially due to better pandemic preparedness than before. However, lessons from MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV have shown that the journeys for these developments can still be challenging moving ahead. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at .com/xxx/s1, Table S1 : Example of full search strategy in Pubmed, Table S2 : Google Search: 2019-nCoV diagnostics, Table S3 : Summary of diagnostic assays developed for 2019-nCoV, Table S4
What is the mechanism of action for rupintrivir?
prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
314
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
Has rupintrivir been shown to reduce the symptoms of a rhinoviral infection?
in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
315
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What is the primary etiology of acute respiratory infection?
viral
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
308
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What is RSV?
respiratory syncytial virus
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
309
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What virus is most commonly associated with acute respiratory infections?
human rhinovirus
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
310
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What viruses are most frequently associated with acute respiratory infections?
HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV)
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
311
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What are the clinical characteristics of asthma?
chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
313
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What risk factor was associated with hospitalization and death during the 2009 H1N1 influence pandemic?
morbid obesity
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
317
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
How many surface proteins are on the H1N1 influenza virus?
two
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
319
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What are the 2 surface proteins on the H1N1 influenza virus?
haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA)
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
320
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What pharmaceutical targets the NA glycoprotein of the H1N1 influenza virus?
oseltamivir
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
322
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What genetic mutation decreases a person's susceptibility to the H1N1 influenza virus?
H275Y
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
323
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
Why is ribavirin treatment limited?
difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers
[ "The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow.", "Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies.", "Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need.", "We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics.", "The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.", "ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] .", "The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] .", "In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals.", "The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] .", "Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent.", "After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41.", "Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%).", "Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later.", "We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly.", "[9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] .", "Rhinovirus (the \"common\" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] .", "HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis.", "HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough.", "Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result.", "Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs.", "Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] .", "Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] .", "Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] .", "A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] .", "Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] .", "Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] .", "Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160).", "There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] .", "As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised.", "Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] .", "A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild.", "The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\".", "That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the \"young and healthy\". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] .", "The lack of real, or perceived, \"real world\" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] .", "Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] .", "Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] .", "The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons.", "The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] .", "In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used.", "Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA.", "They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution.", "During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome.", "Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] .", "An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] .", "Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving \"standard of care\" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] .", "Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful.", "The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study.", "Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research.", "In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required.", "Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] .", "RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection.", "Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised.", "A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities.", "RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] \n\nThe clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] .", "While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well.", "A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children.", "All three bacteria \"levels\" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology.", "It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children.", "[8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al.", "Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads.", "Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care.", "Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS.", "Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections.", "Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza.", "More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\".", "He explained the next best thing would be a \"Bart's\" student as \"they were cheaper than chimpanzees\". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies.", "Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain.", "After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public.", "The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] .", "Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers.", "Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV.", "Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain.", "After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] .", "Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period.", "However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] .", "Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor.", "Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] .", "Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial \"safety and pathogenicity\" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] .", "The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient.", "Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] .", "A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research.", "In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] .", "The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research.", "The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1.", "We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic \"in the field\" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation.", "The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig.", "In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] .", "The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] .", "The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need.", "There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might.", "The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints.", "2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies.", "Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data.", "The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season.", "The guidance states; \"…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...\". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting.", "Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig.", "These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral.", "There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur.", "X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent.", "Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent.", "It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies.", "The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation.", "Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] .", "In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy.", "New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ].", "Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] .", "The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway.", "2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g.", "The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g.", "The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of \"at risk\" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population.", "Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model.", "Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study.", "In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus.", "Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus.", "Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined.", "Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] .", "We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients.", "An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; \"This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV.\" [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model.", "[81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] .", "The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection.", "The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified.", "Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated.", "An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] .", "Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours.", "Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding.", "It is also believed that by using this \"triggered dosing\" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection.", "Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] .", "Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo.", "In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies.", "Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together.", "The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design.", "These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009.", "An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species.", "A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] .", "A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model.", "All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile.", "With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer.", "and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person.", "Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] .", "In recent years it has been used to demonstrate \"gene switching signatures\" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers.", "The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant.", "The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the \"real world\" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable.", "The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use.", "Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs.", "It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention.", "It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc).", "A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics.", "Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses.", "HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs.", "An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW.", "drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures.", "Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors.", "The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements').", "Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article.", "Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript.", "All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients.", "All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'." ]
1,740
324
The Human Viral Challenge (HVC) model has, for many decades, helped in the understanding of respiratory viruses and their role in disease pathogenesis. In a controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers removed from community exposure to other infections, this experimental model enables proof of concept work to be undertaken on novel therapeutics, including vaccines, immunomodulators and antivirals, as well as new diagnostics. Crucially, unlike conventional phase 1 studies, challenge studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints that then guide decisions on how to optimise subsequent field studies, as recommended by the FDA and thus licensing studies that follow. Such a strategy optimises the benefit of the studies and identifies possible threats early on, minimising the risk to subsequent volunteers but also maximising the benefit of scarce resources available to the research group investing in the research. Inspired by the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) now commonly applied in the preclinical phase, HVC studies allow refinement and reduction of the subsequent development phase, accelerating progress towards further statistically powered phase 2b studies. The breadth of data generated from challenge studies allows for exploration of a wide range of variables and endpoints that can then be taken through to pivotal phase 3 studies. We describe the disease burden for acute respiratory viral infections for which current conventional development strategies have failed to produce therapeutics that meet clinical need. The Authors describe the HVC model’s utility in increasing scientific understanding and in progressing promising therapeutics through development. The contribution of the model to the elucidation of the virus-host interaction, both regarding viral pathogenicity and the body’s immunological response is discussed, along with its utility to assist in the development of novel diagnostics. Future applications of the model are also explored. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0784-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Text: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) manifest as Upper (URI) or Lower (LRI) respiratory tract infections and may move between the two compartments; ARIs represent the most common infectious diseases and are predominantly of viral aetiology. The global burden of ARI is substantial with significant morbidity and mortality occurring in children, the elderly and immunocompromised [1] . In the UK alone during the period 2014-2015, respiratory disease caused an estimated 15,800 excess winter deaths [2] . In the USA, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause substantial mortality especially among people aged 65 and older [3] . However, although deaths in the industrialised world are widely reported, developing countries feel the burden particularly; out of an estimated 1.9 million child deaths from ARIs in 2000, 70% of those deaths occurred in Africa and south-east Asia [4] . The Millennium Summit at the United Nations in 2000 led to the setting up of the Millennium Development Goals. A study reported the progress made in meeting those goals in 40 developing countries; it concluded that the prevalence of ARI was 13%, health expenditure and per capita gross domestic product is directly associated with the prevalence of the disease [5] . Viral heterogeneity associated with ARIs is well established [6] . In the past, human rhinovirus (HRV) has been identified as the virus most frequently associated with respiratory illness with 30-50% of infections annually on average, and up to 80% of upper respiratory infections during the autumn outbreaks [7] . After HRVs, coronaviruses (CoV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) are the next most frequent. More recently an evaluation of illness in 6,266 children under ten years of age in Australia, South East Asia and Latin America emphasised both the viral heterogeneity and the impact of ARI. Of the 2,421 children who experienced 3,717 individual influenza-like Illness (ILI) episodes, rhinovirus/enterovirus was most prevalent (41. 5%). Influenza followed this (15.8%), adenovirus (ADV) (9.8%), PIV and RSV (both 9.7%), CoV (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (HMPV) (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBoV) (2.0%). The percentage of children missing school or childcare was between 21.4% for HBoV and 52.1% for influenza [8] . We have compared the data from the two reports one from 2003 [7] and the other in 2017 [8] and found that the reports, despite being separated by 14 years, were similar, with the single exception of HBoV, discovered in 2005 (Table 1) , which we discuss later. Feng et al. [9] described in detail the distribution of ARIs causing hospitalisation by age group: they observed that RSV was predominantly observed in the young and elderly, and influenza although significant in the young was noticeably more predominant in the elderly. Interestingly they observed that co-detection of viruses tended to occur more commonly in the younger age groups, particularly those under the age of five. Rhinovirus (the "common" cold) HRV infections, often considered trivial can significantly contribute to missed days from work and school, though infections are typically self-limiting [7] . HRV infections throughout the year and in many cases, manifest with symptoms such as nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, sore throat, and cough. HRV is known to be the primary cause of ARI and a severe contributing factor in exacerbations of atopic disease, e.g., asthma as well other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] [11] [12] [13] . HRV infections are associated with significant economic implications as well as being an important contributor to sinusitis, otitis media, bronchitis and primary pneumonia [14] [15] [16] . HRV is a considerable cause of morbidity in specific at-risk groups such as infants, the elderly, immunocompromised, and, as already mentioned, chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. At present, HRV is considered the number one cause of asthma exacerbations [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] . Asthma is a complex disease, characterised by chronic airway inflammation, and a history of respiratory symptoms such as wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough. Over time these symptoms can vary in their intensity [20] . Each year over 300 million people worldwide are affected by asthma: approximately 250,000 people die as a result. Many deaths are due to suboptimal long-term medical care and delay in obtaining help during severe exacerbations of the disease [21] . Treatments to prevent worsening of symptoms and other therapies for mild to moderate asthma that avert relapse, i.e., the symptoms worsen again when the treatment stops, are significant unmet medical needs. The human challenge model has been used to investigate the viral pathogenicity [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and recent publications on the asthma challenge model have focused on how the asthmatic host responds to HRV infection. Work is ongoing as to susceptibility to viral induced asthma worsening [27, 28] innate immune dysregulation [29] and induction of innate, and type 2 responses in nasal and bronchial epithelial secretions [30] . The pathogenesis of rhinoviral infection, along with other ARIs, in exacerbations of airway disease, has been investigated extensively. Impaired host responses to virus infection, a better understanding of the mechanisms of abnormal immune responses and the potential to develop novel therapeutic targets for virus-induced exacerbations have all used the HVC model [12, [31] [32] [33] [34] . Despite previous research work on multiple small molecule antivirals, such as pleconaril which have been tested using both the experimental challenge model and field studies [35] [36] [37] , there is currently no licensed treatment for HRV infections Other compounds have been tested against HRV, such as Vapendavir (BTA798) which prevented the release of viral RNA into the target cell and demonstrated a reduction in peak viral load in the HVC model [38] . A subsequent study in asthmatics was completed and although not published the compound did have a limited effect [39] . Pirodavir an intranasal capsid-binding molecule reached phase 3 clinical trials for HRV prevention and treatment in the 1990s. Although the compound decreased viral replication and shedding, it failed to show a significant reduction in the duration or severity of symptoms [40, 41] . A Protease inhibitor, rupintrivir thats prevents cleavage of viral proteins required for replication was tested in an HRV challenge trial. Rupintrivir was well tolerated and reduced viral loads and respiratory symptoms [36] . However, in studies of natural infection, it did not significantly affect viral loads or symptom severity [42] . Treatments such as zinc-containing products are now widely discredited as demonstrated by the withdrawal of a Cochrane report and JAMA editorial [43] [44] [45] . Current treatment of HRV infections primarily consists of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines to manage symptoms. There is also no licensed vaccine, and while there has been some progress on developing multivalent vaccines [46] , development in this area is hampered by the sheer number of serotypes that need to be covered (at present over 160). Despite HRV being associated with up to 50% of adult asthma exacerbations and up to 80% of childhood exacerbations, there are no HRV-specific asthma therapies [34] . As we better understand the interaction between the virus and the host, new therapies such as the monoclonal antibodies (anti-IgE [omalizumab] and anti-IL-5 [mepolizumab]) along with small molecules carefully targeting specific immune signalling pathways, HRV-specific prophylactic treatment may become practical [47] [48] [49] [50] . In order to prevent exacerbations, the design of new therapeutics could potentially improve efficacy by both directly acting to inhibit viral replication and alleviate the symptoms of asthma and COPD [51] . Influenza virus is a well-known human pathogen and can cause severe morbidity and mortality, particularly in older patients, those with co-morbidities and in the immunocompromised. In 2009, the first pandemic virus of the 21 st century hospitalised 195,000 to 403,000 in the US alone resulting in 8,870 to 18,300 deaths by mid-2010 [52] . A World Health Organization (WHO) global pooled analysis of 70,000 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised H1N1 pandemic patients from 19 countries revealed that of the 9,700 patients admitted to intensive care units, 2,500 died, and that morbid obesity might be a risk factor for hospitalisation and/or death [52] . Obesity was confirmed as a factor associated with a higher likelihood of admission to hospital in influenzainfected patients [53] . The 2009 pandemic was considered mild. However, the classic W shaped age distribution curve of infection for a pandemic virus was observed. That is high mortality in the very young and the old, but an additional spike in death amongst the "young and healthy". The pandemic, as did previous outbreaks, occurred in successive waves, but despite national policies favouring the use of antiviral drugs, few patients received these before admission to hospital, and many were given antibiotics [54] . The lack of real, or perceived, "real world" efficacy of currently available antivirals leads to the overuse of antibiotics and the subsequent problems that may arise [55] [56] [57] . The yearly seasonal morbidity and mortality of influenza results in hospitalisation and death mainly among the high-risk groups. Each year epidemics of seasonal influenza are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths worldwide [58] . In first world / industrialised countries, most deaths associated with influenza occur among people age 65 or older [59] . Clinics and hospitals, in many countries, can be overwhelmed during peak illness periods, and there can be substantial economic cost [60] . The virus itself has been well characterised, and the two surface proteins, the haemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA) are important in both vaccine and antiviral development [61] . The effects of seasonal influenza epidemics in developing countries are not fully known, but research estimates that 99% of deaths in children under five years of age with influenza-related lower respiratory tract infections are found in developing countries [59, 62] . Currently, vaccines and antivirals exist for the prevention and treatment of influenza, but both have limitations in efficacy due to the rapid evolution of the virus as it mutates on a yearly basis and the sudden unexpected emergence of pandemic influenza strains. The effectiveness of recent annual influenza vaccines (to date mostly based on the HA, and rarely the NA surface glycoproteins) has languished between 37% and 70% over successive influenza seasons. In particular, the failure of the vaccine across the winter season of 2014-2015, where the overall adjusted effectiveness was 23% [95% confidence interval 14, 31] [63] is memorable. In a mismatched year, the mortality rate is increased in the most at-risk populations [64, 65] . The problem of ensuring that the seasonal vaccine is correctly matched to the upcoming circulating strain highlights the need for rapid development of inter-seasonal/universal vaccines and also the need for a way of testing their efficiency rapidly and accurately before the lengthy and expensive mass production is engaged which takes many months [66, 67] . Antiviral drugs exist of which currently the NA inhibitor oseltamivir is most commonly used. This is active against all known NA subtypes of influenza, and one would, therefore, assume against all influenza strains. They may have decreasing effect with the emergence of resistant influenza strains in which NA protein changes preventing efficient oseltamivir binding and thus its ability to inhibit the essential activity of the viral NA. For example, one genetic mutation known as 'H275Y'a substitution of histidine for tyrosine at NA position 275 -confers an evolutionary advantage to the virus including the 2009 H1N1 influenza [68] . During the 2013-2014 influenza season, 59 (1.2%) of 1,811 influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 virus isolates in 20 of 50 US states had the H275Y oseltamivir resistance substitution. No isolates were resistant to zanamivir [69] . Although animal studies have demonstrated limited transmission of mutant viruses [70, 71] , it is thought that the rise of oseltamivir resistance may be due to community transmission [72, 73] rather than the H275Y mutation becoming fixed in the viral genome. Asystematic systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from 2000 onwards concluded that most RSV-associated child deaths occur particularly in preterm infants and in infants up to 1-year of age [62, 74] . An effective maternal RSV vaccine or monoclonal antibody could have a substantial effect on disease burden in this age group [75] . The RSV-specific monoclonal antibody palivizumab is approved for prevention of serious LRI caused by RSV in susceptible infants. Economic benefit in a UK health setting has not been shown due to the high cost and lack of benefit on serious outcomes [76] . A single-centre cohort study of 22 infants showed no difference in treatment outcomes for patients receiving palivizumab when compared to patients only receiving "standard of care" treatment [77] . Despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit, post-licensure data supports the use of palivizumab for reducing RSV-associated hospitalisations in premature infants under 33 weeks and in children with chronic lung and heart diseases [78] . Importantly, palivizumab resistant mutant virus has rarely been isolated in clinical specimens [79] . The RSV treatment ribavirin is limited due to difficulty with aerosol delivery, cost and potential harm to healthcare workers, despite off-label treatment of immunocompromised patients being reasonably successful. In the immunocompromised, therapy with a concomitant immunoglobulin or palivizumab has had mixed results, probably due to the difficulty of knowing when to initiate treatment [80] . Despite the call for the accelerated development of prevention and treatment strategies for an effective RSV vaccine for children [81] , research has stalled for decades since the death in the 1960s of two subjects in a clinical study. These subjects were infected with a communityacquired RSV infection after receiving the US National Institutes for Health (NIH's) formalin-inactivated, alumprecipitated RSV candidate vaccine. In contrast to influenza for which vaccines to date have shown themselves to be moderately effective but in need of improvement, RSV vaccines require substantially more research. There is currently no licensed vaccine for RSV; the most advanced candidate vaccine recently failed to show efficacy in a field study [82] . Effective treatments are urgently required. RSV is, even amongst healthcare professionals, considered a childhood disease and other confounders have obscured the understanding of the consequences of RSV in adults. RSV is poorly understood as a disease in the elderly [83] , and while the morbidity and mortality in children are of importance, it has been clearly shown that RSV has a comparable health burden to influenza in the elderly [84] . As an example, a recent study was conducted on adult (≥18 years) patients admitted to an emergency department with suspected ARI during 2013-2015 (N = 3743). Multiplex PCR was used to diagnose the cause of the respiratory infection. Eighty-seven patients were identified with RSV. A comparator group with influenza (n=312) was utilised. Based on a 20-day all-cause mortality endpoint, adult patients were less likely to be diagnosed with RSV than with flu (2.3 vs 8.3%, respectively), also they were older, often diagnosed with pneumonia, COPD, hypoxemia, and bacterial co-infection. RSV infection in the elderly was significantly associated with a greater risk of death than seasonal influenza, adjusted for potential confounders and comorbidities. [85] The clinical significance of viral/bacterial co-infections has long been a controversial topic. While severe bacterial pneumonia following influenza infection has been well described, associations are less clear among infections caused by viruses common in young children; secondary infections due to other viruses are less well understood and has been reviewed by others [86] . Although assessing the overall contribution of bacteria to disease severity is complicated by the presence of many confounding factors in clinical studies, understanding the role of viral/bacterial co-infections in defining the outcome of paediatric ARI may potentially reveal novel treatment and prevention strategies, improving patient outcomes [33, [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] . A recent (2017) publication considered the role of bacterial colonisation with Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis during symptomatic and asymptomatic viral upper respiratory infection in the nasopharynx of 4 to 7-year-old children during URI and when well. Using a multiplex PCR, virus was detected in about 80% of upper respiratory tract infections (URIs) in children and is also detectable in the nasopharynx of 30% of asymptomatic children. All three bacteria "levels" were higher during acute URI visits compared to asymptomatic surveillance visits by the children. Of note, however, is that even during asymptomatic follow-up visits, if the virus was present, all bacteria were detected at higher levels [96] . It is worth noting that the presence of confounding infections, can mask the importance of the primary aetiology. Taylor et al. [8] report the incidence of HBoV following its identification in 2005 from the respiratory tract samples of children, as an important respiratory pathogen in children. However, the role of this virus on its own as a pathogen of significance was initially unclear, co-infection with other viruses or bacteria was common and confounding. Moesker et al. [97] studied whether HBoV alone could cause acute respiratory infections in children. Using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), they were able to exclude co-infections amongst those admitted to intensive care unit and studied HBoV viral loads. Of the 990 children who tested positive for a respiratory virus by RT-PCR, HBoV and RSV were detected in 178 and 366 of the children respectively. Forty-nine HBoV-positive patients and 72 RSV-positive patients were admitted to the intensive care. Seven HBoV-infected cases with severe ARI had no other co-infection (7/49, 14%). Importantly, these children did not have another detectable virus as determined by highly sensitive NGS. Also, they had much higher HBoV loads than other patients positive for HBoV, i.e., those with a co-infection. Although small, this study provides strong support that HBoV can cause serious ARI in children with no viral and bacterial co-infections. The history of the human viral challenge model Since Sir Edward Jenner performed the first documented HVC study with smallpox on the 14 th of May 1796 the usefulness of such studies has been apparent [98] . More than a century later, Sir Christopher Andrews returned from the US in 1931 he had observed the use of chimpanzees in the study of influenza. The funding for similar work in the UK was insufficient, and therefore Sir Christopher enrolled students from St Bartholomew's Hospital in London. He explained the next best thing would be a "Bart's" student as "they were cheaper than chimpanzees". Over 100 students immediately enrolled, but continued their studies and were not isolated in the same way the chimpanzees had been in the USA [99] . Unfortunately the investigators believed that the symptoms observed may not have been due to the challenge virus, but other respiratory infections acquired in the community, thus confounding the studies. A year later the UK's Medical Research Council (MRC) terminated the work. After the conclusion of World War II, the withdrawal of the US troops from the UK left the American Red Cross 'Harvard Hospital' Field Unit on Salisbury plain. The hospital became the Common Cold Unit (CCU) led by Dr David Tyrell, from 1946, volunteers were inoculated by instilling small quantities of the virus into their noses [100] . The CCU housed healthy volunteers in relative isolation from other people, thereby reducing the risk of contact with community-acquired sources of infection or from them passing on the virus to members of the public. The unit was eventually closed in 1989; during four decades of research, it attracted 20,000 volunteers. Its research contributed to a better understanding of respiratory viruses, viral lifecycle, possible vaccines [101] as well as the first licensed antiinfluenza compound amantadine [102] . The use of healthy volunteers in the HVC model provided, and still offers, a unique opportunity to describe the viral lifecycle. Investigators know with certainty the time of infection, nasal virus shedding can be measured, symptoms recorded prospectively, and participants are selected with low pre-existing immunity to the challenge virus to ensure a statistically significant infection rate with a small number of volunteers. Thus, such studies can maximise the safety and efficacy data obtained while minimising the risk to study volunteers and limited research funding. Although serum IgG, for influenza virus, was traditionally measured via the HAI assay, as the entry criteria for volunteers into studies, micro neutralisation assays are used for RSV and HRV. Other work does suggest screening for antibodies to the NA influenza surface protein should be considered [103] or T-cell responses to internal proteins [104] should be considered. After the closure of the CCU experimental infection studies continued in the USA using small motels and hotels replacing the huts on Salisbury Plain. These studies contributed to the significant development of the new NA inhibitors during the 1990s, including the inhaled drug zanamivir and the orally available drug oseltamivir [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] . Studies however also continued in the UK, specifically the University of Southampton who performed important work in atopic volunteers, demonstrating they had more severe colds when experimentally challenged with rhinovirus, than non-atopic controls [115] . The experimental A/Texas H1N1 influenza virus that was used successfully during the 1990s was implicated in the development of myocarditis in an experimentally infected subject, although a causal link was never demonstrated [116] . However, this incident halted work in the USA for a substantial period. Most, if not all, challenge viruses are manufactured according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standard. Although controlled nasal inoculation differs from naturally occurring infectionin which exposure to variable quantities of the virus may occur at various mucosal sites -the developed HVC model used in challenge studies mimics natural disease as far as possible [25, 117, 118] . We have described the production of a new GMP stock of virus using an HRV-16 isolate from an 18-year-old experimentally infected healthy female volunteer, provided by colleagues from University of Virginia Children's Hospital, USA. Importantly, the clinical sample was provided with the appropriate medical history and consent of the donor. We manufactured this new HRV-16 stock by minimal passage in a WI-38 cell line, to reduce the risk of mutations during the Good Manufacturing Practice process. Having first subjected the stock to rigorous adventitious agent testing and determining the virus suitability for human use, we conducted an initial "safety and pathogenicity" clinical study in adult volunteers in a dedicated clinical quarantine facility in London [118] . Our group started HVC studies in the UK in 2001, and since then we have conducted multiple studies with over 2,500 volunteers inoculated with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or human rhinovirus (HRV), and provided numerous proofs of concept [119] [120] [121] . The human viral challenge model: shortening the drug development pathway for ARIs Influenza, RSV and HRV infection have similar symptomatology, but this differs in severity and predominance of upper, lower or systemic symptoms as has been described by the Center for Disease Control [122] . However, it is not easy to diagnose between the different aetiologies of ARIs, and better diagnostics are needed [123] . Symptoms are common to each infection and manifest on a gradient. Generally, but far from always, influenza infection is more likely to result in a patient feeling so unwell as to take to their bed and have a fever, than RSV, an HRV, CoV or other common cold virus infection, during which daily life is usually less impacted. A variety of animal models exist to research respiratory viruses such as influenza [124] [125] [126] , RSV [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] , HRV [22, [138] [139] [140] . No single animal offers a platform for all respiratory viruses that infect humans, and different animal models exist for the same virus, which can give different, often conflicting results. In addition, the principles of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) were developed over 50 years ago to provide guidance and ensure humane animal research. Over time they have become national and international legislation/regulations. The policies of organisations that fund or conduct animal research include these principles as part of the condition of funding [141] . The shared symptomatology of respiratory viruses requires a single standard research platform that can be used to evaluate respiratory disease pathogenesis and the efficacy of candidate therapeutics. The use of a dedicated, purpose-built 24 en-suite bedroom isolation facility in which carefully screened volunteers can be safely inoculated with challenge viruses and intensively monitored may help reduce the use of animals while providing a single consistent research platform with standardised evaluable endpoints for respiratory virus research. Also, we have used a standardised diary card across our studies, which allows for comparison of the symptoms that each virus causes and the efficacy of the therapeutic being tested. We have included a copy of the diary card in the Additional file 1. It is difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a specific antiviral therapeutic "in the field" due to the presence of circulating community co-infections of differing microbial aetiology. The HVC model allows the opportunity to study a virus in isolation. HVC studies and field studies are complementary research stratagems necessary for the development of effective ARI therapeutics. In contemporary HVC trials, (Fig. 1 ) healthy volunteers are administered an investigational therapeutic either before (prophylaxis trials) or after (treatment trials) inoculation with the specific challenge strain of the virus. The viruses used in the HVC model are not attenuated and produce symptoms consistent with clinically observed ARI [25, 117, 118] . Each virus is propagated under GMP conditions, with a minimal number of passages from the isolates to the challenge stocks [118, 142] . The few mutations that occur within the virus are rapidly selected out due to a genetic bottleneck, with the consequence that the virus in the human host is considered wild-type [143] . The similarity between virus recovered from the inoculated host and the originator reference virus strain provides assurance that the model disease process is closely aligned with the reference virus strain and is not altered nor attenuated. There are limited licensed therapeutic options against respiratory viruses, highlighting a significant unmet medical need. A model such as the HVC allows the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics. The model shortens both preclinical and early clinical development phases by providing a better understanding of the host and pathogen's initial interaction and has the potential to make the necessary vaccines and medicines more rapidly available than traditional development approaches otherwise might. Shortening the traditional development pathway through the early use of a Proof of Concept (PoC) study that incorporates the HVC model (Fig. 2) provides essential evaluable endpoints. Unlike conventional phase 1 studies which rarely include any assessment of efficacy, almost all HVC studies include evaluable efficacy endpoints such as reduction in AUC viral load (mainly recovered from upper respiratory tract samples such as nasal wash or nasopharyngeal swab), volunteer self-reported symptoms, peak symptom score, total symptom score amongst others. Small numbers of subjectsoften in the order of 30-45 per treatment group-are typically included in these rapid to execute short duration studies. The resulting safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data in controlled conditions, guide decisions on whether or not to progress to field studies, providing a most valuable set of data immediately after, or even as part of, the conventional phase 1 safety study. The HVC model also opens a different development route alongside traditional phase 1 allowing rapid progress to statistically powered phase 2b studies that will generate the efficacy data needed to support licensing, while still providing suitable safety data. The FDA guidance on developing influenza therapeutics [144] states that challenge trials cannot take the place of efficacy (phase 2) trials. The guidance states; "…Challenge trials can provide useful exposure-response and safety information, as well as an opportunity to demonstrate pharmacological antiviral activity in humans under controlled conditions outside the influenza season. Specifically, data from challenge trials can contribute to dose selection for phase 2b and phase 3 trials, and provide the opportunity to explore the effects of different times of drug initiation relative to virus exposure...". Challenge trial refinements are closing the gap between the experimental infection model and the natural infection setting. The HVC study duration of several weeks is shorter than a field-based phase 2 study that waits for a natural outbreak of the virus and the duration of which can be several months/years. These studies save Fig. 1 The Human Viral Challenge Model. The study typically consists of inputs, such as the volunteers, their selection criteria, isolation in quarantine and exposure to a GMP virus. There are two treatment options; a vaccination/prophylaxis with an antiviral or b treatment with an antiviral. Outputs from the study, summarised on the right, such as virus symptoms, virus shedding etc. X is the number of days before virus exposure vaccination may occur. Y is the number of days post virus exposure that a volunteer may be followed for development time when the transition between phases is fully optimised. Importantly, unlike traditional phase 1b/phase 2 studies, HVC studies are not dependent on a natural outbreak of infection, which can occur at random, and for which the exact time of infection may not be apparent. They provide evaluable endpoints, comparative PD and PK data, along with additional biomarker data on product performance in humans. It must, however, be stated that most often such studies enrol otherwise healthy young adults which imply that the outcome of the infection in the placebo group may be seen as mild to moderate, to some extent. The safety of volunteers has to remain the priority of investigators. The HRV/HVC model can be a potent tool, not just to study HRV infection and disease, but also to investigate the mechanisms of exacerbation in patients with chronic respiratory disease and to conduct efficacy studies for new therapies. Human challenge studies with HRV have been shown to produce infection in over 90% of serologically susceptible subjects and result in a clinical syndrome that is comparable to that reported with natural colds [145, 146] . Symptoms usually appear within 24 hours and peak at 48-72 hours after inoculation. Virus shedding follows a pattern similar to that of their symptoms. In recent times, several hundred inoculations of adult subjects have been reported and have established this as a safe and effective method in which to study HRV-related disease in both healthy and asthmatic subjects [145] . These studies have provided a knowledge base to further develop the HRV experimental model and provide a controlled and useful tool to develop new therapies for the disease areas associated with HRV infection. New treatments for asthma and COPD are urgently needed, and small animal models of asthma are poorly predictive of efficacy. Most drugs that are effective in these animal models are not found to be effective in later stages of development in humans. Models that more closely follow clinical features of human asthma and COPD are needed [32, [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] ]. We have already described current influenza antiviral drugs that can shorten disease and reduce the severity of symptoms if taken early enough after infection, and their prophylactic use can decrease the risk of infection; their utility has been debated however [152] . The two main classes of currently effective antiinfluenza drugs are the NA inhibitors, such as zanamivir (Relenza™), oseltamivir (Tamiflu™), peramivir (Rapivab™) [153] and M2 inhibitors, although drug resistance makes this class unusable [154] . The HVC model has recently been used extensively to evaluate new classes of antiviral compounds against influenza, including those such as experimental monoclonal antibodies targeting epitopes within the highly conserved and exposed part of the M2 viral surface Fig. 2 The role of the HVC model in the clinical development pathway. Short duration proof of concept studies, which incorporate the HVC model, typically include small numbers of subjects. The resulting safety and, particularly, efficacy data can more accurately guide decisions on whether to expose a larger number of subjects to promising candidate therapeutics in field studies than conventional phase 1 safety data alone otherwise might protein [155, 156] the conserved stalk of the HA [157] and small molecule antiviral drugs that target the viral polymerase, e.g. favipiravir [158] . The HVC model allows for the rapid evaluation of novel therapeutic compounds which may be difficult to evaluate in the field, due to the nature of "at risk" groups, e.g. paediatrics. Specifically, and given the described historical experience with RSV vaccines, it is important that benefit can first be demonstrated in a healthy population. In the past, unlike influenza and HRV, the HVC model has not been routinely used with RSV. Recently, however, there are several antiviral therapeutics that have reached an advanced stage of development using the model. We had for some time wished to restart the HVC/RSV studies at the University of London, the two significant challenges that had stalled antiviral development for RSV presented a considerable research need. In association with the DeVincenzo lab at the University of Tenessee and the biotech company Alnylam, we set about designing possibly the first HVC/RSV study. Alnylam pioneered the use of RNA interference (RNAi) which is a natural mechanism that regulates protein expression and is mediated by small interfering RNAs (siRNA). Working with both groups, we manufactured an RSV Type A virus to GMP standard and titrated it in 35 human volunteers who we divided into five groups, each which was intranasally inoculated with increasing titre (3.0-5.4 log plaque-forming units/person) of the challenge virus. Intranasally. Overall, in this new model, 77% of volunteers consistently shed virus. Infection rate, viral loads, disease severity, and safety were similar between cohorts and were unrelated to the quantity of RSV received. Symptoms began soon after initial viral detection, peaked in severity near when viral load peaked and subsided as viral loads slowly declined. We concluded that regardless of the titre administered once infections were established the viral load drove illness. We saw no adverse events linked to the virus [25] . Using this new model we conducted an HVC clinical study and demonstrated for the first time that an RNAi had significant antiviral activity against human RSV infection -this established the first-ever proof of concept for an RNAi therapeutic in humans adults [159] . An editorial in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, described the utility of the HVC/RSV model saying; "This model permits the relatively quick and efficient study of new therapeutics in humans and assists in making critical decisions whether to advance a product into costly human trials in populations at highest risk for disease; children, elderly or immunocompromised patients. This constitutes a major and welcome advance in the field of RSV." [81] It is notable that two compounds that have distinct modes of action have recently been evaluated using the HVC model. First-in-class nucleoside analogue ALS-008176, the efficacy of which was first demonstrated in the HVC model, is currently under evaluation in hospitalised infants [160, 161] . The HVC trial was of randomised, double-blind design, and studied healthy adults inoculated with RSV Memphis 37B [25] . A total of 62 participants received ALS-008176 or placebo for five days after confirmation of RSV infection by PCR (tested twice daily post inoculation). The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) for viral load post infection. More rapid RSV clearance and a greater reduction in viral load, with accompanying improvements in the severity of clinical disease, were demonstrated in the groups treated with ALS-008176 when compared to the placebo group [160] . Intensive sampling allowed for any potential mutations associated with resistance to be rapidly identified. No such resistant mutations were observed [160] . An RSV-entry inhibitor, GS-5806, a second molecule, first-in-[its]-class was also evaluated. Among the 54 subjects that received active treatment, lower viral load, lower total mucus weight and a lower AUC symptom score were highly significant when compared to placebo [119] . Based on these challenge study data, this therapeutic is now also progressing into potentially pivotal field studies [162] . An essential element of design in both studies was the timing of the first administration of therapeutic postexperimental virus inoculation; the timing was dependent on the detection of virus in nasal wash samples post inoculation of challenge virus by a rapid PCR assay [163] , rather than at an arbitrary time point. Subsequently the therapeutic was administered every 12 hours. Careful dose timing, at a clinically relevant point of detection, contributed to the positive outcomes of both studies. It is also believed that by using this "triggered dosing" model, it better mimicked what would happen in a clinical setting as symptoms are known to appear soon after the onset of virus shedding. The HVC model is not limited to novel antiviral compounds but is also important for the evaluation of novel vaccines. Influenza vaccine performance in recent years raises questions about the most appropriate correlates of protection. Unlike field studies, HVC studies are useful tools for assessing the correlates of protection, vital for vaccine development [103, 104, 164] . Specifically, the importance of the humoral and cellular responses has been highlighted along with the pre-existing T-cell immunity for other respiratory viruses [104] . A recent publication describes the use of the HVC model to demonstrate the efficacy of a novel intranasal proteosome-adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (P-TIV). In two separate studies, selected subjects who were naïve to A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus, were dosed via nasal spray with one of three regimens of P-TIV or placebo. Together, the studies evaluated one or two doses, 15 μg or 30 μg, either once only or twice 14 days apart (1 x 30 μg, 2 x 30 μg, 2 x 15 μg) and subjects were challenged with A/Panama/2007/1999 (H3N2) virus. Immune responses to the vaccine antigens were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and nasal wash secretory IgA (sIgA) antibodies. Vaccine efficacy was observed ranging from 58% to 82%, comparable to traditional vaccines. The studies also demonstrate that protection against illness associated with evidence of influenza infection significantly correlated with pre-challenge HAI (serum IgG) titres (p = 0.0003) and mucosal IgA (p≤0.0001) individually, and HAI (p = 0.028) and sIgA (p = 0.0014) together. HAI and sIgA levels were inversely related to rates of illness. These studies demonstrated the efficacy of this novel intranasal vaccine and answered some important questions concerning true correlates of protection against influenza infection which will help drive future vaccine design. As well as achieving its primary aims, it revealed valuable insights into the correlates of protection and will, we hope, aid future vaccine design [164] . An inter-seasonal or universal influenza vaccine is desperately needed; it will save many lives, whether in those unexpected years when the recommended composition is not matched, or when a pandemic occurs, as it did in 2009. The significance of the 1918 pandemic [165, 166] makes it very clear; up to 100 million people died. A universal vaccine is one that can be prepared for the unexpected, a virus that occurs due to the reassortment of viral genes from different host species. The HVC model is possibly the only way to initially test such a universal vaccine. A universal candidate could generate an immune response against the highly conserved virus ion channel protein M2, [167] [168] [169] [170] , although no vaccine has been shown to be effective in this regard; monoclonal antibodies alone have, the HVC model showed their efficacy [156] . Alternatively, a vaccine may target the conserved stalk of the HA protein [104, 171] , or elicit a T-cell response to the internal proteins [172] [173] [174] [175] . All are possibilities that have been and can be explored more efficiently using the HVC model. Although HVC studies provide PoC, researchers, as we have shown, have employed regulatory design standards typical of later phase efficacy studies. With the development of molecular technology, it is now possible to refine the statistical analysis by stratifying the subjects based on their immune profile. For instance, it is now possible to assess whether a subject is carrying other known respiratory pathogens (bacteria, viruses etc.) and if there is a possible impact on the set of results from the volunteer. Subjects often consent for further analysis of their samples, which allows a valuable biobank of samples to be built for further testing. Moving forward, such samples will allow the use of the HVC model to understand further what happens when a virus infects a person. It is worth noting that the HVC model is not limited to PoC work on potential therapeutic agents; it is also extensively being used for research purposes, upon which improved treatments for respiratory viruses can be built. In recent years it has been used to demonstrate "gene switching signatures" that could form part of a diagnostic that would reveal infected individuals before they become symptomatic, in the early stages of infection; this could be vitally important in the event of a pandemic [176, 177] . Also, the HVC model has been used to allow a comparison of the relative disease dynamics of different respiratory viruses [24] and to provide a better understanding of the interaction of the virus and the human host [26, 178, 179] . The HVC model has increased our understanding of the viral life cycle and disease pathogenesis in a tightly controlled setting using small numbers of volunteers. Each volunteer is isolated from each other, and the wider community, ensuring that the disease under consideration is the only one of interest. The applicability of the virus used to challenge volunteers in the HVC model to a virus that an individual might become exposed to in the "real world" is significant. Whether challenge trials are feasible is dependent on the availability of adequately safety-tested challenge virus strains that are of know providence. The HVC model provides certain knowledge of the character of the virus; the exact time point of infection; measurability of nasal virus shedding; prospective recording of symptoms and pre-selection of participants for viral challenge who are sero-suitable. This ensures that a statistically significant rate of infection is achieved with the minimal number of volunteers, thus optimising the risk-benefit ratio that supports the determination of therapeutic efficacy. Crucial to HVC study design is the timing of administration of the first dose of product under investigation to determine optimal effectiveness, not just in the challenge study itself, but in both later stage clinical studies and final clinical use. The HVC model is an important tool in drug development, in particular with regard to acute respiratory infections. It can accelerate the development of therapeutics that address multiple unmet medical needs. It helps in the understanding of the relationship between a virus and its human host and offers the potential for the development of early-stage diagnostics. It contributes towards identifying new areas for therapeutic intervention. Possibly, and arguably, more importantly, it can ensure that scarce medical resources are directed towards later stage clinical development in an evidence-based manner, and promising therapeutic opportunities are prioritised. A careful and targeted study design process is a crucial step towards the successful outcome of a challenge trial, because almost all parameters, can be either controlled or at least known (either pre-or post-hoc). Furthermore, results from such trials can be used to make commercial decisions and can lead to major publications, expanding the collective understanding of the scientific community. Samples from such experiments are of immense value to researchers for the understanding of host interaction mechanisms and the development and validation of therapeutics. Utilisation of consistently collected historical data from HVC studies informs the accurate design and powering of subsequent studies. HVC studies have been successful in providing proof of concept for DNA vaccines, T-cell vaccines, intranasal vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules against a range of important respiratory viruses. It is also encouraging to see that the HVC model is now expanding into further patient populations such as the elderly, asthmatics and those with other conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An expanding archive of data from preceding studies is an invaluable asset to assist in the selection of volunteers, decide on appropriate endpoints and refine future field study designs. This allows for safer, statistically sound and more rapidly delivered research. drafted the initial version of this manuscript with author RLW. hVIVO was responsible for overall management of this work and verified the accuracy of the data presented. Other non-author contributors included Ben Murdoch of hVivo who provided figures. hVivo would like to thank the volunteers without whose altruism the human viral challenge studies conducted at hVivo over many years would not have been possible. The work, including professional medical writing services for preparing this manuscript, was wholly funded by hVivo Services Limited, the employer of all authors. Author RLW conceived the strategy for this paper. Author RLW and professional medical writer Samina Hamilton drafted the article (see 'Acknowledgements'). Authors RLW and AG critically reviewed the complete article for important intellectual content. Authors RLW and AG had full authority over the choice of the journal and approved the final article. Author RLW is a guarantor for the paper and takes overall responsibility for this publication. All other authors contributed to the writing and review of this manuscript. Ethics approval and consent to participate All clinical studies were described received appropriate Ethical Committee approval, including informed consent of volunteers. All authors declare that they are employees of hVivo and as such, have provided or do provide ethical professional clinical research services to academic, biotechnology, or pharmaceutical clients. A patent (patent applications 14/366602 (US) 12813946.6 (EP) application is in progress regarding specific utilisation of the HVC model. This does not alter the authors' adherence to International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) 'Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3'.
What study is reported in this report?
bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,692
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How does the genome of 2019-vCOV compare with SARS like viruses and SARS-COV?
Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,693
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How different is it from SARS-related viruses?
the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,694
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What novel features does the genome have?
its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,695
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.
Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,696
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What are Coronaviruses?
Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,697
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What are four generas?
Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV)
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,698
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What do evolutionary analyses show?
that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,699
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What are the examples that have emerged as human pathogens?
severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,700
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
Where did these viruses originate before crossing the barrier to infect humans?
these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV]
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,701
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What COVs were known to infect humans before December 2019?
6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,702
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What do HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 cause?
self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,703
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is the contrast with SARS-COV and MERS=COV?
SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,704
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What was the authors' recent report on?
a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,705
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is analyzed in this study?
a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,706
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What genome sequence was available for this study?
2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262)
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,707
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What strains were included in this study?
strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,708
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How was the Phylogenetic construction done?
by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,709
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How were the evolutionary distances computed?
using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,710
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How was the structural analysis of orf8 done?
using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED)
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,711
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What was done for the prediction of protein secondary structures?
initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,712
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is the RNA of the 2019-nCOV?
29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,713
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What was the G+C content?
38%
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,714
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How are 2019-nCOV and SARS-COV similar?
There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,715
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
Where is the major distinction?
in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,716
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What do the S1 and S2 subunits of spike glycoprotein contain?
The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,717
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What are the chacateristics of the S2 subunit?
S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,718
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What would be the benefit of the identity of the S2 unit?
the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,719
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How do the S1 subunits compare with that of SARS-likeCOV and human SARS-COV?
Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,720
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
Where are the amino acid differences?
Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain,
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,721
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is responsible for the interaction with host receptor?
the external subdomain,
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,722
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
what will the investigation of external subdomain reveal?
its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,723
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
How do most bat SARSr-COV differ from 2019-nCOV and human SARS-COV?
bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,724
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
Which strains do not have such deletions?
Yunnan strains such as the WIV1
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,726
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is the consequence of lack of deletions in Yunnan strains?
can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,727
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
Being closest to 2019-nCoV, which species do the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45 infect?
can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,728
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What would lessen the likelihood of jumping the barrier?
The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,729
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What do the results indicate?
that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,730
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is orf8?
an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,731
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What orf8 length do Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain?
fulllength orf8
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,732
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
From where have the original SARS-CON orf8 been acquired?
two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C)
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,733
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What does the orf8 derived from 2019-nCOV belong to?
the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,734
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is the relation between the new2019-nCOV and the conserved orf8?
the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,735
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
orf8 was shown to do what?
to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,736
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What high possibility does the novel orf8 have?
to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,737
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
What is the summary of this report?
2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
[ "A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes.", "We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses.", "The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein.", "Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus.", "Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales.", "Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs.", "Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] .", "The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] .", "Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ \n\nHCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] .", "On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] .", "As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea.", "The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] .", "All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies.", "In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ).", "MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup.", "These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] .", "The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] .", "The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] .", "Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] .", "Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment.", "Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics.", "Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation\n\ncomplex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation\n\nshort peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results.", "The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ).", "Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots.", "The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP).", "The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] .", "Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor.", "Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV.", "Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine.", "It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity.", "The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro.", "It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] .", "Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities.", "IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study.", "The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] .", "Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion,\n\nBat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018\n\nBat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] .", "In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ).", "The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV.", "Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119).", "The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs.", "For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe \n\nAs shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] .", "The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV.", "In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop.", "The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8.", "All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45.", "Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ).", "The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses.", "In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important.", "More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV." ]
2,634
3,738
A mysterious outbreak of atypical pneumonia in late 2019 was traced to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan of China. Within a few weeks, a novel coronavirus tentatively named as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was announced by the World Health Organization. We performed bioinformatics analysis on a virus genome from a patient with 2019-nCoV infection and compared it with other related coronavirus genomes. Overall, the genome of 2019-nCoV has 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-like-CoVZXC21 and 82% with that of human SARS-CoV. The phylogenetic trees of their orf1a/b, Spike, Envelope, Membrane and Nucleoprotein also clustered closely with those of the bat, civet and human SARS coronaviruses. However, the external subdomain of Spike’s receptor binding domain of 2019-nCoV shares only 40% amino acid identity with other SARS-related coronaviruses. Remarkably, its orf3b encodes a completely novel short protein. Furthermore, its new orf8 likely encodes a secreted protein with an alpha-helix, following with a beta-sheet(s) containing six strands. Learning from the roles of civet in SARS and camel in MERS, hunting for the animal source of 2019-nCoV and its more ancestral virus would be important for understanding the origin and evolution of this novel lineage B betacoronavirus. These findings provide the basis for starting further studies on the pathogenesis, and optimizing the design of diagnostic, antiviral and vaccination strategies for this emerging infection. Text: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses that belong to the subfamily Coronavirinae, family Coronavirdiae, order Nidovirales. There are four genera of CoVs, namely, Alphacoronavirus (αCoV), Betacoronavirus (βCoV), Deltacoronavirus (δCoV), and Gammacoronavirus (γCoV) [1] . Evolutionary analyses have shown that bats and rodents are the gene sources of most αCoVs and βCoVs, while avian species are the gene sources of most δCoVs and γCoVs. CoVs have repeatedly crossed species barriers and some have emerged as important human pathogens. The best-known examples include severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) which emerged in China in 2002-2003 to cause a large-scale epidemic with about 8000 infections and 800 deaths, and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV) which has caused a persistent epidemic in the Arabian Peninsula since 2012 [2, 3] . In both of these epidemics, these viruses have likely originated from bats and then jumped into another amplification mammalian host [the Himalayan palm civet (Paguma larvata) for SARS-CoV and the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) for MERS-CoV] before crossing species barriers to infect humans. Prior to December 2019, 6 CoVs were known to infect human, including 2 αCoV (HCoV-229E and HKU-NL63) and 4 βCoV (HCoV-OC43 [ HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1 usually cause self-limiting upper respiratory infections in immunocompetent hosts and occasionally lower respiratory tract infections in immunocompromised hosts and elderly [4] . In contrast, SARS-CoV (lineage B βCoV) and MERS-CoV (lineage C βCoV) may cause severe lower respiratory tract infection with acute respiratory distress syndrome and extrapulmonary manifestations, such as diarrhea, lymphopenia, deranged liver and renal function tests, and multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, among both immunocompetent and immunocompromised hosts with mortality rates of ∼10% and ∼35%, respectively [5, 6] . On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China [7] . Subsequent virological testing showed that a novel CoV was detected in these patients. As of 16 January 2020, 43 patients have been diagnosed to have infection with this novel CoV, including two exported cases of mild pneumonia in Thailand and Japan [8, 9] . The earliest date of symptom onset was 1 December 2019 [10] . The symptomatology of these patients included fever, malaise, dry cough, and dyspnea. Among 41 patients admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan, 13 (32%) required intensive care and 6 (15%) died. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest computerized tomography scans [10] . We recently reported a familial cluster of 2019-nCoV infection in a Shenzhen family with travel history to Wuhan [11] . In the present study, we analyzed a 2019-nCoV complete genome from a patient in this familial cluster and compared it with the genomes of related βCoVs to provide insights into the potential source and control strategies. The complete genome sequence of 2019-nCoV HKU-SZ-005b was available at GenBank (accession no. MN975262) ( Table 1 ). The representative complete genomes of other related βCoVs strains collected from human or mammals were included for comparative analysis. These included strains collected from human, bats, and Himalayan palm civet between 2003 and 2018, with one 229E coronavirus strain as the outgroup. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbour joining method was performed using MEGA X software, with bootstrap values being calculated from 1000 trees [12] . The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (1000 replicates) was shown next to the branches [13] . The tree was drawn to scale, with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and were in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site [14] . All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA X [15] . Multiple alignment was performed using CLUSTAL 2.1 and further visualized using BOX-SHADE 3.21. Structural analysis of orf8 was performed using PSI-blast-based secondary structure PREDiction (PSIPRED) [16] . For the prediction of protein secondary structure including beta sheet, alpha helix, and coil, initial amino acid sequences were input and analysed using neural networking and its own algorithm. Predicted structures were visualized and highlighted on the BOX-SHADE alignment. Prediction of transmembrane domains was performed using the TMHMM 2.0 server ( Secondary structure prediction in the 5 ′ -untranslated region (UTR) and 3 ′ -UTR was performed using the RNAfold WebServer ( RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) with minimum free energy (MFE) and partition function in Fold algorithms and Table 2 . Putative functions and proteolytic cleavage sites of 16 nonstructural proteins in orf1a/b as predicted by bioinformatics. Putative function/domain Amino acid position Putative cleave site complex with nsp3 and 6: DMV formation complex with nsp3 and 4: DMV formation short peptide at the end of orf1a basic options. The human SARS-CoV 5 ′ -and 3 ′ -UTR were used as references to adjust the prediction results. The single-stranded RNA genome of the 2019-nCoV was 29891 nucleotides in size, encoding 9860 amino acids. The G + C content was 38%. Similar to other (Table 2 ). There are no remarkable differences between the orfs and nsps of 2019-nCoV with those of SARS-CoV (Table 3) . The major distinction between SARSr-CoV and SARS-CoV is in orf3b, Spike and orf8 but especially variable in Spike S1 and orf8 which were previously shown to be recombination hot spots. Spike glycoprotein comprised of S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit contains a signal peptide, followed by an N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), while the S2 subunit contains conserved fusion peptide (FP), heptad repeat (HR) 1 and 2, transmembrane domain (TM), and cytoplasmic domain (CP). We found that the S2 subunit of 2019-nCoV is highly conserved and shares 99% identity with those of the two bat SARS-like CoVs (SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45) and human SARS-CoV (Figure 2 ). Thus the broad spectrum antiviral peptides against S2 would be an important preventive and treatment modality for testing in animal models before clinical trials [18] . Though the S1 subunit of 2019-nCoV shares around 70% identity to that of the two bat SARS-like CoVs and human SARS-CoV (Figure 3(A) ), the core domain of RBD (excluding the external subdomain) are highly conserved (Figure 3(B) ). Most of the amino acid differences of RBD are located in the external subdomain, which is responsible for the direct interaction with the host receptor. Further investigation of this soluble variable external subdomain region will reveal its receptor usage, interspecies transmission and pathogenesis. Unlike 2019-nCoV and human SARS-CoV, most known bat SARSr-CoVs have two stretches of deletions in the spike receptor binding domain (RBD) when compared with that of human SARS-CoV. But some Yunnan strains such as the WIV1 had no such deletions and can use human ACE2 as a cellular entry receptor. It is interesting to note that the two bat SARS-related coronavirus ZXC21 and ZC45, being closest to 2019-nCoV, can infect suckling rats and cause inflammation in the brain tissue, and pathological changes in lung & intestine. However, these two viruses could not be isolated in Vero E6 cells and were not investigated further. The two retained deletion sites in the Spike genes of ZXC21 and ZC45 may lessen their likelihood of jumping species barriers imposed by receptor specificity. A novel short putative protein with 4 helices and no homology to existing SARS-CoV or SARS-r-CoV protein was found within Orf3b ( Figure 4 ). It is notable that SARS-CoV deletion mutants lacking orf3b replicate to levels similar to those of wildtype virus in several cell types [19] , suggesting that orf3b is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. But orf3b may have a role in viral pathogenicity as Vero E6 but not 293T cells transfected with a construct expressing Orf3b underwent necrosis as early as 6 h after transfection and underwent simultaneous necrosis and apoptosis at later time points [20] . Orf3b was also shown to inhibit expression of IFN-β at synthesis and signalling [21] . Subsequently, orf3b homologues identified from three bat SARSrelated-CoV strains were C-terminally truncated and lacked the C-terminal nucleus localization signal of SARS-CoV [22] . IFN antagonist activity analysis demonstrated that one SARS-related-CoV orf3b still possessed IFN antagonist and IRF3-modulating activities. These results indicated that different orf3b proteins display different IFN antagonist activities and this function is independent of the protein's nuclear localization, suggesting a potential link between bat SARS-related-CoV orf3b function and pathogenesis. The importance of this new protein in 2019-nCoV will require further validation and study. Orf8 orf8 is an accessory protein found in the Betacoronavirus lineage B coronaviruses. Human SARS-CoVs isolated from early-phase patients, all civet SARS-CoVs, and other bat SARS-related CoVs contain fulllength orf8 [23] . However, a 29-nucleotide deletion, Bat SL-CoV ZXC21 2018 Bat which causes the split of full length of orf8 into putative orf8a and orf8b, has been found in all SARS-CoV isolated from mid-and late-phase human patients [24] . In addition, we have previously identified two bat SARS-related-CoV (Bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C) and proposed that the original SARS-CoV full-length orf8 is acquired from these two bat SARS-related-CoV [25] . Since the SARS-CoV is the closest human pathogenic virus to the 2019-nCoV, we performed phylogenetic analysis and multiple alignments to investigate the orf8 amino acid sequences. The orf8 protein sequences used in the analysis derived from early phase SARS-CoV that includes full-length orf8 (human SARS-CoV GZ02), the mid-and late-phase SARS-CoV that includes the split orf8b (human SARS-CoV Tor2), civet SARS-CoV (paguma SARS-CoV), two bat SARS-related-CoV containing full-length orf8 (bat-CoV YNLF_31C and YNLF_34C), 2019-nCoV, the other two closest bat SARS-related-CoV to 2019-nCoV SL-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45), and bat SARS-related-CoV HKU3-1 ( Figure 5(A) ). As expected, orf8 derived from 2019-nCoV belongs to the group that includes the closest genome sequences of bat SARS-related-CoV ZXC21 and ZC45. Interestingly, the new 2019-nCoV orf8 is distant from the conserved orf8 or Figure 5(B) ) which was shown to trigger intracellular stress pathways and activates NLRP3 inflammasomes [26] , but this is absent in this novel orf8 of 2019-nCoV. Based on a secondary structure prediction, this novel orf8 has a high possibility to form a protein with an alpha-helix, following with a betasheet(s) containing six strands ( Figure 5(C) ). The genome of 2019-nCoV has overall 89% nucleotide identity with bat SARS-related-CoV SL-CoVZXC21 (MG772934.1), and 82% with human SARS-CoV BJ01 2003 (AY278488) and human SARS-CoV Tor2 (AY274119). The phylogenetic trees constructed using the amino acid sequences of orf1a/b and the 4 structural genes (S, E, M, and N) were shown (Figure 6(A-E) ). For all these 5 genes, the 2019-nCoV was clustered with lineage B βCoVs. It was most closely related to the bat SARS-related CoVs ZXC21 and ZC45 found in Chinese horseshoe As shown in Figure 7 (A-C), the SARS-CoV 5 ′ -UTR contains SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, SL5C, SL6, SL7, and SL8. The SL3 contains trans-cis motif [27] . The SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4, S5, SL5A, SL5B, and SL5C structures were similar among the 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and the bat SARS-related ZC45. In the 2019-nCoV, part of the S5 found was inside Figure 7 Continued the orf1a/b (marked in red), which was similar to SARS-CoV. In bat SARS-related CoV ZC45, the S5 was not found inside orf1a/b. The 2019-nCoV had the same SL6, SL7, and SL8 as SARS-CoV, and an additional stem loop. Bat SARS-related CoV ZC45 did not have the SARS-COV SL6-like stem loop. Instead, it possessed two other stem loops in this region. All three strains had similar SL7 and SL8. The bat SARS-like CoV ZC45 also had an additional stem loop between SL7 and SL8. Overall, the 5 ′ -UTR of 2019-nCoV was more similar to that of SARS-CoV than the bat SARS-related CoV ZC 45. The biological relevance and effects of virulence of the 5 ′ -UTR structures should be investigated further. The 2019-nCoV had various 3 ′ -UTR structures, including BSL, S1, S2, S3, S4, L1, L2, L3, and HVR (Figure 7(D-F) ). The 3 ′ -UTR was conserved among 2019-nCoV, human SARS-CoV and SARS-related CoVs [27] . In summary, 2019-nCoV is a novel lineage B Betacoronavirus closely related to bat SARS-related coronaviruses. It also has unique genomic features which deserves further investigation to ascertain their roles in viral replication cycle and pathogenesis. More animal sampling to determine its natural animal reservoir and intermediate animal host in the market is important. This will shed light on the evolutionary history of this emerging coronavirus which has jumped into human after the other two zoonotic Betacoroanviruses, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.
Approximately how many people died during the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic?
During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide.
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
259
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.
What social and economic factors contributed to the large fatality rate in the 1918 influenza pandemic?
Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time.
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
286
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.
What problems were faced by medical staff during the 1918 epidemic?
in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. T
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
291
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.
What helpful drugs are available now to control the disease or to provide palliative care for influenza patients?
Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
295
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.
How has the mortality rate due to influenza declined in USA over past decades?
in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
297
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.
Is there an Influenza vaccine?
We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time.
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
299
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.
for the 2009 influenza pandemic, what were the case fatality rates?
that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) .
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
300
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.
What factors would contribute now to the faster rates of influenza infections?
Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses.
[ "nan\n\nText: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 .", "The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle.", "It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war.", "Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918.", "For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections.", "Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes.", "Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries.", "In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity.", "Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil.", "Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) .", "Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) .", "Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) .", "The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) .", "Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years.", "Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate.", "Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets .", "They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China.", "but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) .", "First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly.", "Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) .", "Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013.", "Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly.", "Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) .", "Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly.", "During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg.", "I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously.", "The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23).", "Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society.", "However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919.", "Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past.", "We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) .", "My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript." ]
776
301
nan Text: Influenza and influenza viruses are wellknown popular topics to medical professionals and the general public. Influenza viruses had caused a pandemic globally during 1918 and 1919, and that influenza pandemic had taken away more than 20 million people's lives in the world. However, in my opinion, it is unlikely that influenza viruses will again cause a pandemic on a level (both of the morbidity rate and the mortality rate) comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Influenza viruses very easily reassort, recombine, and point mutate in nature due to their segmented RNA genome structures, however, unlike highly pathogenic (virulent) viruses like rabies virus, Lassa fever virus, smallpox virus, eastern equine encephalitis virus, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1); most influenza viruses (wild types and mutants) are moderately pathogenic. The case fatality rates of some highly virulent viruses and related references are listed in Table 1 . On November 11, 1918 , the fighting of World War I was stopped, and World War I was officially ended on June 28, 1919 with the signing of the Versailles Treaty. It is estimated that around 8.5-10 million soldiers lost their lives in World War I due to battle. The war also directly caused more than 6 million civilian deaths. Millions of people suffered from hunger and malnutrition during the war. Malnutrition weakened the human immune system and made a person more vulnerable to infectious diseases like tuberculosis and influenza, therefore, hunger and malnutrition were indirectly responsible for millions of deaths in the world in that period of time. For example, about 700,000 Germans died from malnutrition-related diseases in the years of 1914-1918. During the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, between 21 and 25 million people died of influenza worldwide. Those people were killed both directly and indirectly by influenza virus infections. Many families were too poor to buy food and coal, and to afford health care expenses when their family members were ill. Influenza virus could infect all members of a family, and this could result in no one left to feed the fires, and to prepare food for the whole family, even if they had firewood, coal, and food left in their homes. Sadly, a large number of people died of influenza virus infections along with starvation, cold, and poor living conditions (8) . In recent years, while hunger and malnutrition are not major and serious problems in some developed countries anymore, they are still very difficult to overcome in many developing countries. In these less-developed countries, there were approximately 925 million people who suffered from hunger; 125 million children were underweight; and 195 million children were stunted each year (9) . Nevertheless, in comparison to 1918 and 1919, currently, we have much better social and economic conditions and public health systems globally; and generally speaking, the majority of people in the world have better nutritional and educational statuses; better living and working conditions; therefore, better general health and immunity. Furthermore, in 1918 and 1919, physicians and nurses almost had nothing in their hands to help individuals who were infected by influenza viruses. Today, although we still do not have very effective, powerful, and practical anti-influenza drugs available, we at least have some improved, useful, and helpful anti-viral drugs like zanamivir, and effective, convenient anti-cold medicines like Tylenol or Advil. We do not have a universal vaccine to prevent all influenza virus infections, but we can make effective vaccines to a specific influenza virus strain in a short time. Actually, in the United States of America, the influenza classed mortality rate declined from 10.2/100,000 in the 1940s to 0.56/100,000 in the 1990s; and the classed mortality rates of 1957-1958 and 1968-1969 influenza pandemics were not remarkably different from the non-pandemic seasons (10) . Because of the above reasons, we can optimistically assume that even the same strain of influenza virus, which caused pandemic in 1918 and 1919, would not be able to kill millions of people and cause a pandemic comparable to the 1918-1919 pandemic again in the future. Additionally, a significant number of viruses can cause influenza-like syndromes, such as rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Coxsackie B virus, echovirus, and metapneumovirus (11, 12) . Some of the above-mentioned viruses like adenovirus and mutated coronavirus could cause problems that are comparable to influenza viruses (13, 14) . The World Health Organization (WHO) mistakenly raised the level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to the highest phase 6 on June 11, 2009 (15) . However, the truth was that most cases of H1N1 influenza A virus infections were mild, the symptomatic case fatality rate was only 0.005% in New Zealand (16) ; and in New York City, the case fatality rate was 0.0094-0.0147% for persons ≥65 years old, and for those of 0-17 years old, the case fatality rate was 0.0008-0.0012% (17) . Some researchers argued that it should not have been called an influenza pandemic in the first place if the clinical severity was considered (15, (18) (19) (20) . I believe it was unwise that we had paid too much 23) . Not surprisingly, every year there would be some influenza patients and a few of them would die from the infections, as it is almost impossible to eliminate influenza viruses from the natural environment in many years. The severity of a viral infection is determined by both of the viral virulence (pathogenicity) and the host immunity. Some researchers' opinions on H7N9 avian influenza virus were incorrect and/or inadequate. They mainly focused on influenza viruses and worried about viral mutations, viral pathogenicity, viral adaptation, and transmission. They overestimated the negative part of socio-economic factors of the present east China: overcrowded population in the epidemic region; very busy national and international transportation and travel; a large number of live poultry markets . . . but they underestimated the currently changed, developed, and improved positive part of socio-economic factors in China. The following factors might be used to explain why that H7N9 influenza A virus epidemic was limited and controlled in China, and only a few immunocompromised patients were killed by H7N9 influenza A virus. First, China has a relatively organized and effective public health system, there are four levels of (national, provincial, prefectural-level city, and county) centers for disease control and prevention all over China (24) . Second, physicians and nurses in China were prepared and knowledgeable of influenza virus infections. Third, samples from patients with suspected influenza virus infections were collected and sent to the local and national centers for disease control and prevention promptly. H7N9 influenza A viruses were isolated and identified very quickly. Thereby, they were able to diagnose, confirm, and report three cases of H7N9 influenza patients in the early stage of the epidemic (24, 25) . Fourth, health care and public health workers were protected properly. Consequently, none of the health professionals was infected by H7N9 influenza A virus in 2013. However, a surgeon died of H7N9 influenza in Shanghai, China in January of 2014 (26) . Fifth, they detected H7N9 influenza A viruses from the samples of chickens, pigeons, and the environment of live poultry markets in Shanghai (27) ; and closed the live poultry markets of the involved epidemic region quickly. Sixth, patients were isolated and treated timely in hospitals, 74% (1251/1689) of those close contacts of H7N9 influenza patients were monitored and observed. Thus, H7N9 influenza A virus could not spread to a bigger population (24) . Last but not least, we are connected to the Internet now, and it seems that our planet is much smaller today than the earlier days when we did not have the Internet, because communication and information exchange have become so fast, easy, and convenient presently. During that avian influenza epidemic, some influenza experts in the world shared/exchanged H7N9 influenza A virus information and provided professional consultations and suggestions efficiently and rapidly. All these public health routine practices and measures resulted in that H7N9 influenza epidemic being controlled and stopped in China (24) . I have to point out that the cases of diagnosed H7N9 avian influenza A virus infection might only be the tip of the iceberg. Aside from one laboratory confirmed asymptotic case of H7N9 influenza A virus infection in Beijing (22), there were probably many undetected mild or asymptotic cases of influenza A H7N9 infection. The reason is that most people usually think a common cold is a very common and normal occurrence, and they don't take flu-like illnesses seriously. In most situations, they would just stay home and take some medicines. Only those who have very severe flu-like symptoms would see doctors, and thereby be detected and diagnosed, accordingly the real case fatality rate should be much lower than the detected 32.14% (45/140, one case from Taiwan, and one case from Hong Kong) (22, 23). Nowadays, we travel faster, and we travel more frequently and globally, and we have more complicated social activities and lifestyles, thereby increasing the chances of viral mutation; and we realize that influenza viruses are even easier to reassort, recombine, and mutate in nature than many other RNA viruses. However, we are now living in a technologically, economically, and socially much better and advanced society. I believe influenza virus infections are controllable and preventable, with the increased population health and immunity, with the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System, and with standard/routine epidemiological practices, and with new effective anti-viral agents and vaccines in production in the future. Now, I first predict that influenza viruses will unlikely again cause a pandemic on a level comparable to what happened in 1918 and 1919. Hopefully, one day we could consider a strategy to produce a universal vaccine that can prevent people from infections of all influenza virus strains, or we could produce some very effective anti-influenza virus drugs; then influenza would not be a problem anymore. We should learn lessons from the mistakes we made in the past. It is reasonable and necessary to be cautious about influenza viruses, but overreactions or catastrophic reactions should be avoided in the future. My opinion is anti-traditional; the purpose of this article is to influence public health policy, and to save some of the limited resources and money for more important diseases like heart diseases, cancer, diabetes, AIDS, hepatitises, and tuberculosis (15) . Liting Song: conception of manuscript, drafting of manuscript, critical revision of manuscript, and final approval of manuscript. The author would like to recognize the contributions of the reviewers and editors of this manuscript for their corrections and editing, and Dr. Emanuel Goldman for correcting errors related to grammar and syntax of the final manuscript.