Genetic susceptibility of COVID-19: a systematic review of current evidence.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
While COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread worldwide, researchers have linked patterns of traits to poor disease outcomes. Risk factors for COVID-19 include asthma, elderly age, being pregnant, having any underlying diseases such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, and experiencing lifelong systemic racism. Recently, connections to certain genes have also been found, although the susceptibility has not yet been established. We aimed to investigate the available evidence for the genetic susceptibility to COVID-19.Methods
This study was a systematic review of current evidence to investigate the genetic susceptibility of COVID-19. By systematic search and utilizing the keywords in the online databases including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Science Direct, we retrieved all the related papers and reports published in English from December 2019 to September 2020.Results
According to the findings, COVID-19 uses the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor for cell entry. Previous studies have shown that people with ACE2 polymorphism who have type 2 transmembrane serine proteases (TMPRSS2) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Also, two studies have shown that males are more likely to become infected with SARS-CoV-2 than females. Besides, research has also shown that patients possessing HLA-B*15:03 genotype may become immune to the infection.Conclusion
Combing through the genome, several genes related to immune system's response were related to the severity and susceptibility to the COVID-19. In conclusion, a correlation was found between the ACE2 levels and the susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection.
SUBMITTER: SeyedAlinaghi S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8135169 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Effective therapeutic interventions for the treatment and prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are urgently needed. A systematic review was conducted to identify clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for COVID-19 published between 1 December 2019 and 14 October 2020. Data regarding efficacy of interventions, in terms of mortality, hospitalisation and need for ventilation, were extracted from identified studies and synthesised qualitatively. In total, 42 clinical trials were included. Interventions assessed included antiviral, mucolytic, antimalarial, anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory therapies. Some reductions in mortality, hospitalisation and need for ventilation were seen with interferons and remdesivir, particularly when administered early, and with the mucolytic drug, bromhexine. Most studies of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine did not show significant efficacy over standard care/placebo. Dexamethasone significantly reduced mortality, hospitalisation and need for ventilation versus standard care, particularly in patients with severe disease. Evidence for other classes of interventions was limited. Many trials had a moderate-to-high risk of bias, particularly in terms of blinding; most were short-term and some included low patient numbers.This review highlights the need for well-designed clinical trials of therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 to increase the quality of available evidence. It also emphasises the importance of tailoring interventions to disease stage and severity for maximum efficacy.
| S-EPMC9489065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread rapidly across the globe, we aimed to identify and summarize the existing evidence on epidemiological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 and the effectiveness of control measures to inform policymakers and leaders in formulating management guidelines, and to provide directions for future research. We conducted a systematic review of the published literature and preprints on the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak following predefined eligibility criteria. Of 317 research articles generated from our initial search on PubMed and preprint archives on 21 February 2020, 41 met our inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Current evidence suggests that it takes about 3-7 days for the epidemic to double in size. Of 21 estimates for the basic reproduction number ranging from 1.9 to 6.5, 13 were between 2.0 and 3.0. The incubation period was estimated to be 4-6 days, whereas the serial interval was estimated to be 4-8 days. Though the true case fatality risk is yet unknown, current model-based estimates ranged from 0.3% to 1.4% for outside China. There is an urgent need for rigorous research focusing on the mitigation efforts to minimize the impact on society.
| S-EPMC7231098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:During the COVID-19 pandemic general medical complications have received the most attention, whereas only few studies address the potential direct effect on mental health of SARS-CoV-2 and the neurotropic potential. Furthermore, the indirect effects of the pandemic on general mental health are of increasing concern, particularly since the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic (2002-2003) was associated with psychiatric complications. METHODS:We systematically searched the database Pubmed including studies measuring psychiatric symptoms or morbidities associated with COVID-19 among infected patients and among none infected groups the latter divided in psychiatric patients, health care workers and non-health care workers. RESULTS:A total of 43 studies were included. Out of these, only two studies evaluated patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, whereas 41 evaluated the indirect effect of the pandemic (2 on patients with preexisting psychiatric disorders, 20 on medical health care workers, and 19 on the general public). 18 of the studies were case-control studies/compared to norm, while 25 of the studies had no control groups. The two studies investigating COVID-19 patients found a high level of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) (96.2%) and significantly higher level of depressive symptoms (p = 0.016). Patients with preexisting psychiatric disorders reported worsening of psychiatric symptoms. Studies investigating health care workers found increased depression/depressive symptoms, anxiety, psychological distress and poor sleep quality. Studies of the general public revealed lower psychological well-being and higher scores of anxiety and depression compared to before COVID-19, while no difference when comparing these symptoms in the initial phase of the outbreak to four weeks later. A variety of factors were associated with higher risk of psychiatric symptoms and/or low psychological well-being including female gender, poor-self-related health and relatives with COVID-19. CONCLUSION:Research evaluating the direct neuropsychiatric consequences and the indirect effects on mental health is highly needed to improve treatment, mental health care planning and for preventive measures during potential subsequent pandemics.
| S-EPMC7260522 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2, a novel coronavirus, initiated an outbreak of pneumonia from Wuhan in China, which rapidly spread worldwide. The clinical characteristics of the disease range from asymptomatic cases or mild symptoms, which include nonspecific symptoms such as fever, cough, sore throat, headache, and nasal congestion to severe cases such as pneumonia, respiratory failure demanding mechanical ventilation to multi-organ failure, sepsis, and death. As the transmission rate is quite alarming, we require an effective therapeutic strategy to treat symptomatic patients and adopt the preventive measures in order to contain the infection and prevent community transmission. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a public health emergency of international concern, hence repurposing of the drugs is an attractive and a feasible option because PK/PD profile, toxicity profile, and drug interactions are already known. This review emphasizes on the different aspects of COVID-19 such as the epidemiology, etiopathogenesis, diagnosis, and preventive measures to be adopted in order to fight this pandemic. It also highlights upon the ethics preparedness and challenges faced by a developing country like India during such an outbreak. The review focuses on the various approaches adopted till date for developing effective therapeutic strategies including combination of drugs, vaccine therapy, and convalescent plasma therapy to combat this viral outbreak.
| S-EPMC7282680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectives A flare-up in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases threatens the health of people, and though there is no proven pharmacological treatment, many analytical studies have suggested that interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels are elevated in cases of severe COVID-19 and that the anti-IL-6 biologic agent tocilizumab may be beneficial. This is a critical review of studies aiming to assess the safety and efficacy of tocilizumab as compared to the standard regimen in patients with COVID-19. Materials and methods Online databases (PubMed and Cochrane) were searched until June 29, 2020, for original articles investigating the immunological response in COVID-19 and its treatment with tocilizumab. Data on multiple baseline characteristics and pre-specified endpoints were extracted and pooled using a random effect model. We used Review Manager version 5.3 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014, Denmark) and Stata 11.0 (Stata Corporation LP, College Station, TX) for all analyses. Risk ratios (RR) and the weighted mean difference (WMD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Results From a total of 1,246 identified articles, 13 studies were included after duplicate removal and narrowing based on title and abstract. Of the 13 included studies, seven case-control studies were shortlisted for meta-analysis (quantitative) and six-single arm studies were used in the discussion (qualitative). These studies had 766 patients (351 in the tocilizumab arm and 414 in the control arm). Their pooled analysis demonstrated that mortality was significantly lower in the tocilizumab group (RR=0.56 [0.34, 0.92]; p=0.02; I2=76%), as was the need for artificial invasive ventilation (RR=0.34 [0.12, 0.99]; p=0.05; I2=0%) as compared to the control group. No significant differences were observed between tocilizumab and control group in intensive care unit admissions (RR=0.73 [0.15, 3.59]; p=0.70; I2=60%) and risks of post-drug infection (RR=1.29 [0.41, 4.04]; p=0.66; I2=88%). In terms of efficacy outcome, improved oxygen saturation (RR=1.13 [1.04, 1.65]; p=0.02; I2=0%) was reported to be markedly significant in tocilizumab patients when compared with the standard care group. Conclusions Our results based on pooled studies show tocilizumab to be safe and efficacious in reducing mortality among critically ill COVID-19 patients. However, due to the limited number of observational studies, the positive findings should be viewed cautiously and warrant further investigation.
| S-EPMC7652362 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the importance of understanding the underlying conditions that lead to COVID-19. Oral health has systemic implications in the maintenance of a healthy state. This study aimed to summarize evidence on the prevalence of oral health conditions in participants with COVID-19 and assess the associations between oral health conditions and COVID-19 related outcomes.MethodsArticle searches were conducted in five databases and the gray literature from December 1, 2019 to March 1, 2021. Studies that reported oral health conditions for participants with COVID-19 and/or examined associations between oral health and COVID-19 were included.ResultsWe identified 15 articles that encompassed 5,377 participants with COVID-19 from 10 countries. Dry mouth was the most common oral health condition reported (41.0%), followed by oral lesions (38.8%), orofacial pain (18.3%), and periodontal symptoms (11.7%). Based on the pooled odds ratios (ORs), periodontal symptoms were not associated with COVID-19 positivity (OR = 1.1; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.73-1.65) or mortality (OR = 2.71; 95% CI, 0.64-11.51), but were associated with COVID-19 severity (OR = 3.18; 95% CI, 1.81-5.58).ConclusionsOral health conditions are common in participants with COVID-19 and should be considered in both the onset and progression of this disease. Knowledge in this area is still limited, and the quality of the data extracted was low. Further longitudinal studies are needed to ascertain whether oral health conditions are a consequence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 or whether they predate infection and are risk factors for COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8896863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In dengue-endemic regions, the co-infection with SARS-CoV-2 and dengue is a significant health concern. Therefore, we performed a literature search for relevant papers in seven databases on 26 Spetember 2021. Out of 24 articles, the mortality rate and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were 19.1% and 7.8%, respectively. The mean hospital stay was 11.4 days. In addition, we identified two pregnancies with dengue and COVID-19 co-infection; one ended with premature rupture of membrane and intrauterine growth restriction fetus, while the other one ended with maternal mortality and intrauterine fetal death. COVID-19 and dengue co-infection had worse outcomes regarding mortality rates, ICU admission, and prolonged hospital stay. Thus, wise-decision management approaches should be adequately offered to these patients to enhance their outcomes. Establishing an early diagnosis might be the answer to reducing the estimated significant burden of these conditions.
| S-EPMC9111070 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Epidemiological differences between men and women have been reported with regards to sepsis, influenza and severe coronavirus infections including SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. AIM:To systematically review the literature relating to men versus women on SARS-CoV-2 in order to seek differences in disease characteristics (e.g. infectivity, severity) and outcomes (e.g. mortality). METHODS:We searched 3 electronic databases up or observational studies reporting differences between men and women in the SARS-CoV-2 disease characteristics stated. We identified and included 47 studies, reporting data for 21,454 patients mainly from China. RESULTS:The unadjusted mortality rates of men were higher than those of women, with a mortality OR 0.51 [0.42, 0.61] (p<0.001) for women. The proportion of men presenting with severe disease and admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) was also higher than that of women (OR 0.75 [0.60-0.93] p<0.001 and OR 0.45 [0.40-0.52] p<0.001 respectively). Adjusted analyses could not be conducted due to lack of data. CONCLUSION:COVID-19 may be associated with worse outcomes in males than in females. However, until more detailed data are provided in further studies enabling adjusted analysis, this remains an unproven assumption.
| S-EPMC7608911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to identify the potential and definite sources of transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsDue to time constraints and the acute nature of the pandemic, we searched only PubMed/Medline from inception until January 28, 2021. We analyzed the level of evidence and risk of bias in each category and made suggestions accordingly.ResultsThe virus was traced from its potential origin via possible ways of transmission to the last host. Symptomatic human-to-human transmission remains the driver of the epidemic, but asymptomatic transmission can potentially contribute in a substantial manner. Feces and fomites have both been found to contain viable virus; even though transmission through these routes has not been documented, their contribution cannot be ruled out. Finally, transmission from pregnant women to their children has been found to be low (up to 3%).ConclusionEven though robust outcomes cannot be easily assessed, medical personnel must maintain awareness of the main routes of transmission (via droplets and aerosols from even asymptomatic patients). This is the first attempt to systematically review the existing knowledge to produce a paper with a potentially significant clinical impact.
| S-EPMC8102883 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned global health crisis of unprecedented magnitude, claiming millions of lives and pushing healthcare systems in many countries to the brink. Among several factors that contribute to an increased risk of COVID-19 and progression to exacerbated manifestations, host genetic landscape is increasingly being recognized as a critical determinant of susceptibility/resistance to infection and a prognosticator of clinical outcomes in infected individuals. Recently, several case-control association studies investigated the influence of human gene variants on COVID-19 susceptibility and severity to identify the culpable mutations. However, a comprehensive synthesis of the recent advances in COVID-19 host genetics research was lacking, and the inconsistent findings of the association studies required reliable evaluation of the strength of association with greater statistical power. In this study, we embarked on a systematic search of all possible reports of genetic association with COVID-19 till April 07, 2022, and performed meta-analyses of all the genetic polymorphisms that were examined in at least three studies. After identifying a total of 84 studies that investigated the association of 130 polymorphisms in 61 genes, we performed meta-analyses of all the eligible studies. Seven genetic polymorphisms involving 15,550 cases and 444,007 controls were explored for association with COVID-19 susceptibility, of which, ACE1 I/D rs4646994/rs1799752, APOE rs429358, CCR5 rs333, and IFITM3 rs12252 showed increased risk of infection. Meta-analyses of 11 gene variants involving 6702 patients with severe COVID-19 and 8640 infected individuals with non-severe manifestations revealed statistically significant association of ACE2 rs2285666, ACE2 rs2106809, ACE2 rs2074192, AGTR1 rs5186, and TNFA rs1800629 with COVID-19 severity. Overall, our study presents a synthesis of evidence on all the genetic determinants implicated in COVID-19 to date, and provides evidence of correlation between the above polymorphisms with COVID-19 susceptibility and severity.
| S-EPMC9384365 | biostudies-literature