Dataset Information

Plasma ACE2 predicts outcome of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) binds to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) enabling entrance of the virus into cells and causing the infection termed coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19). Here, we investigate associations between plasma ACE2 and outcome of COVID-19.

Methods and results

This analysis used data from a large longitudinal study of 306 COVID-19 positive patients and 78 COVID-19 negative patients (MGH Emergency Department COVID-19 Cohort). Comprehensive clinical data were collected on this cohort, including 28-day outcomes. The samples were run on the Olink® Explore 1536 platform which includes measurement of the ACE2 protein. High admission plasma ACE2 in COVID-19 patients was associated with increased maximal illness severity within 28 days with OR = 1.8, 95%-CI: 1.4-2.3 (P < 0.0001). Plasma ACE2 was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients with hypertension compared with patients without hypertension (P = 0.0045). Circulating ACE2 was also significantly higher in COVID-19 patients with pre-existing heart conditions and kidney disease compared with patients without these pre-existing conditions (P = 0.0363 and P = 0.0303, respectively).

Conclusion

This study suggests that measuring plasma ACE2 is potentially valuable in predicting COVID-19 outcomes. Further, ACE2 could be a link between COVID-19 illness severity and its established risk factors hypertension, pre-existing heart disease and pre-existing kidney disease.

SUBMITTER: Kragstrup TW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8177449 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The lack of available biomarkers for diagnosing and predicting different stages of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently one of the main challenges that clinicians are facing. Recent evidence indicates that the plasma levels of specific miRNAs may be significantly modified in COVID-19 patients. Large-scale deep sequencing analysis of small RNA expression was performed on plasma samples from 40 patients hospitalized for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (between March and May 2020) (median 13.50 [IQR 9–24] days since symptoms initiation) and 21 healthy noninfected individuals. Patients were categorized as hospitalized not requiring oxygen therapy (n = 6), hospitalized requiring low-flow oxygen (n = 23), and hospitalized requiring high-flow oxygen support (n = 11). A total of 1218 different micro(mi)RNAs were identified. When compared with healthy noninfected donors, SARS-CoV-2 infected patients showed significantly (fold change [FC] >1.2 and adjusted p [padj] <0.05) altered expression of 190 miRNAs. The top 10 differentially expressed (DE) miRNAs were miR-122-5p, let-7b-5p, miR-146a-5p, miR-342-3p, miR-146b-5p, miR-629-5p, miR-24-3p, miR-12136, let-7a-5p, and miR-191-5p, which displayed FC and padj values ranging from 153 to 5 and 2.51 × 10-32 to 2.21 × 10-21, respectively, which unequivocally diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection. No differences in blood cell counts and biochemical plasma parameters, including interleukin 6, ferritin and D-dimer, were observed between COVID-19 patients on high-flow oxygen therapy, low-flow oxygen therapy, or not requiring oxygen therapy. Notably, 31 significantly deregulated miRNAs were found when patients on high- and low-flow oxygen therapy were compared. Similarly, 6 DE miRNAs were identified between patients on high flow and those not requiring oxygen therapy. SARS-CoV-2 infection generates a specific miRNA signature in hospitalized patients. Furthermore, specific miRNA profiles are associated with COVID-19 prognosis in severe patients.

Project description:BackgroundThe immuno-receptor Triggering Expressed on Myeloid cells-1 (TREM-1) is activated during bacterial infectious diseases, where it amplifies the inflammatory response. Small studies suggest that TREM-1 could be involved in viral infections, including COVID-19. We here aim to decipher whether plasma concentration of the soluble form of TREM-1 (sTREM-1) could predict the outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre prospective observational study in 3 university hospitals in France. Consecutive hospitalized patients with confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled. Plasma concentration of sTREM-1 was measured on admission and then at days 4, 6, 8, 14, 21, and 28 in patients admitted into an ICU (ICU cohort: ICUC) or 3 times a week for patients hospitalized in a medical ward (Conventional Cohort: ConvC). Clinical and biological data were prospectively recorded and patients were followed-up for 90 days. For medical ward patients, the outcome was deemed complicated in case of requirement of increased oxygen supply > 5 L/min, transfer to an ICU, or death. For Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients, complicated outcome was defined by death in the ICU.ResultsPlasma concentration of sTREM-1 at inclusion was higher in ICU patients (n = 269) than in medical ward patients (n = 562) (224 pg/mL (IQR 144-320) vs 147 pg/mL (76-249), p < 0.0001), and higher in patients with a complicated outcome in both cohorts: 178 (94-300) vs 135 pg/mL (70-220), p < 0.0001 in the ward patients, and 342 (288-532) vs 206 pg/mL (134-291), p < 0.0001 in the ICU patients. Elevated sTREM-1 baseline concentration was an independent predictor of complicated outcomes (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.5 (1.1-2.1), p = 0.02 in ward patients; HR = 3.8 (1.8-8.0), p = 0.0003 in ICU patients). An sTREM-1 plasma concentration of 224 pg/mL had a sensitivity of 42%, and a specificity of 76% in the ConvC for complicated outcome. In the ICUC, a 287 pg/mL cutoff had a sensitivity of 78%, and a specificity of 74% for death. The sTREM-1 concentrations increased over time in the ConvC patients with a complicated outcome (p = 0.017), but not in the ICUC patients.ConclusionsIn COVID-19 patients, plasma concentration of sTREM-1 is an independent predictor of the outcome, although its positive and negative likelihood ratio are not good enough to guide clinical decision as a standalone marker.