Critical illness in COVID-19 is an extreme and clinically homogeneous disease phenotype that we have previously shown1 to be highly efficient for discovery of genetic associations2. Despite the advanced stage of illness at presentation, we have shown that host genetics in patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 can identify immunomodulatory therapies with strong beneficial effects in this group3. Here we analyse 24,202 cases of COVID-19 with critical illness comprising a combination of microarray genotype and whole-genome sequencing data from cases of critical illness in the international GenOMICC (11,440 cases) study, combined with other studies recruiting hospitalized patients with a strong focus on severe and critical disease: ISARIC4C (676 cases) and the SCOURGE consortium (5,934 cases). To put these results in the context of existing work, we conduct a meta-analysis of the new GenOMICC genome-wide association study (GWAS) results with previously published data. We find 49 genome-wide significant associations, of which 16 have not been reported previously. To investigate the therapeutic implications of these findings, we infer the structural consequences of protein-coding variants, and combine our GWAS results with gene expression data using a monocyte transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) model, as well as gene and protein expression using Mendelian randomization. We identify potentially druggable targets in multiple systems, including inflammatory signalling (JAK1), monocyte–macrophage activation and endothelial permeability (PDE4A), immunometabolism (SLC2A5 and AK5), and host factors required for viral entry and replication (TMPRSS2 and RAB2A).
These results are consistent with the functional normality of the brainstem structure and its lack of correlation with microcephaly, suggesting that the disruption produced by the ZV infection does not act in the cell proliferation phase, but mostly in the processes of neuronal migration and differentiation in the telencephalon.
Resumo Este artigo analisa o fenômeno da judicialização da saúde como forma de garantir acesso a tecnologias em saúde (medicamentos, insumos, consultas e procedimentos médicos especializados, órteses, próteses e materiais especiais) no sistema de saúde em Manaus. Partiu-se de uma análise das ações judiciais peticionadas na justiça amazonense de primeiro grau entre 2013 e 2017, com análise referencial e crítica de situações semelhantes encontradas na literatura em outros estados da federação. A pesquisa foi realizada em quatro etapas, que consistiram na identificação de todas as ações relacionadas à saúde, seleção, construção de banco de dados com as categorias retiradas dos processos e tratamento estatístico, e análise dos dados coletados. O resultado demostrou os principais motivos que desencadeiam a judicialização da saúde, entre os quais a majoritária representação judicial realizada por órgãos de defesa da cidadania da esfera pública. Também ficou clara a interferência da justiça nos fluxos e procedimentos do Sistema Único de Saúde, decidindo de forma personalíssima em detrimento da coletividade. Conclui-se pela necessidade de diálogo entre os órgãos de justiça e da saúde, forçando maior organização dos entes federados no cumprimento de suas obrigações e redução de ações na justiça para obtenção do direito à saúde.
In the version of this article initially published, the name of Ana Margarita Baldión-Elorza, of the SCOURGE Consortium, appeared incorrectly (as Ana María Baldion) and has now been amended in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.