ABSTRACT
The inflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6) is pivotal for orchestrating the immune response. Inhibitors of IL-6 signaling are being investigated as treatments for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a Mendelian randomization study investigating the effect of IL-6 signaling on susceptibility to COVID-19 and pneumonia. Our results showed that genetically proxied inhibition of IL-6 signaling was associated with reduced risk of COVID-19, but also with increased risk of pneumonia. Respiratory disease is a main feature of severe COVID-19, and the potential of IL-6 signaling inhibitors to increase risk of pneumonia warrants vigilance and caution in their application to treat COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
ObjectivesTo use human genetic variants that proxy angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor drug effects and cardiovascular risk factors to provide insight into how these exposures affect lung ACE2 and TMPRSS2 gene expression and circulating ACE2 levels. DesignTwo-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis. SettingSummary-level genetic association data. ParticipantsParticipants were predominantly of European ancestry. Variants that proxy ACE inhibitor drug effects and cardiometabolic risk factors (body mass index, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lifetime smoking index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and type 2 diabetes mellitus) were selected from publicly available genome-wide association study data (sample sizes ranging from 188,577 to 898,130 participants). Genetic association estimates for lung expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 were obtained from the Gene-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project (515 participants) and the Lung eQTL Consortium (1,038 participants). Genetic association estimates for circulating plasma ACE2 levels were obtained from the INTERVAL study (4,947 participants). Main outcomes and measuresLung ACE2 and TMPRSS2 expression and plasma ACE2 levels. ResultsThere were no association of genetically proxied ACE inhibition with any of the outcomes considered here. There was evidence of a positive association of genetic liability to type 2 diabetes mellitus with lung ACE2 gene expression in GTEx (p = 4x10-4) and with circulating plasma ACE2 levels in INTERVAL (p = 0.03), but not with lung ACE2 expression in the Lung eQTL Consortium study (p = 0.68). There were no associations between genetically predicted levels of the other cardiometabolic traits with the outcomes. ConclusionsThis study does not provide evidence to support that ACE inhibitor antihypertensive drugs affect lung ACE2 and TMPRSS2 expression or plasma ACE2 levels. In the current COVID-19 pandemic, our findings do not support a change in ACE inhibitor medication use without clinical justification. Summary boxesO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSO_LISevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. C_LIO_LISerine protease TMPRSS2 is involved in priming the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein for cellular entry through the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor. C_LIO_LIExpression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the lung epithelium might have implications for risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity of COVID-19. C_LI What this study addsO_LIWe used human genetic variants that proxy ACE inhibitor drug effects and cardiometabolic risk factors to provide insight into how these exposures affect lung ACE2 and TMPRSS2 expression and circulating ACE2 levels. C_LIO_LIOur findings do not support the hypothesis that ACE inhibitors have effects on ACE2 expression. C_LIO_LIWe found some support for an association of genetic liability to type 2 diabetes mellitus with higher lung ACE2 expression and plasma ACE2 levels, but evidence was inconsistent across studies. C_LI
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Wine has been the focus in the prevention of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) development because resveratrol abundant in wine has anti-carcinogenic properties. However, epidemiologic results have been heterogenous in the chemopreventive effect of wine on the development of EOC. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis for comparing EOC risk between wine and never drinkers using previous related studies. METHODS: After extensive search of the literature between January 1986 and December 2008, we analyzed 10 studies (3 cohort and 7 case control studies) with 135,871 women, who included 65,578 of wine and 70,293 of never drinkers. RESULTS: In all studies, there was no significant difference in EOC risk between wine and never drinkers (odds ratio [OR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.38; random effects). When we performed re-analysis according to the study design, 3 cohort and 7 case control studies showed that there were also no significant differences in EOC risk between wine and never drinkers, respectively (OR, 1.44 and 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74 and 2.82 and 0.88 to 1.22; random effects). In sub-analyses using 2 case-control studies, EOC risk was not different between former and never drinkers (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.44; fixed effect), and between current and former drinkers (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.34; random effects). CONCLUSION: Although resveratrol, abundantly found in wine, is a promising naturally occurring compound with chemopreventive properties on EOC in preclinical studies, this meta-analysis suggests the epidemiologic evidence shows no association between wine drinking and EOC risk.
