Suppr超能文献

没有证据表明 ACE2 或 TMPRSS2 导致 COVID 风险的人群差异。

No evidence that ACE2 or TMPRSS2 drive population disparity in COVID risks.

机构信息

Root Deep Insight, Boston, MA, USA.

Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.

出版信息

BMC Med. 2024 Aug 26;22(1):337. doi: 10.1186/s12916-024-03539-0.

Abstract

Early in the SARS-CoV2 pandemic, in this journal, Hou et al. (BMC Med 18:216, 2020) interpreted public genotype data, run through functional prediction tools, as suggesting that members of particular human populations carry potentially COVID-risk-increasing variants in genes ACE2 and TMPRSS2 far more often than do members of other populations. Beyond resting on predictions rather than clinical outcomes, and focusing on variants too rare to typify population members even jointly, their claim mistook a well known artifact (that large samples reveal more of a population's variants than do small samples) as if showing real and congruent population differences for the two genes, rather than lopsided population sampling in their shared source data. We explain that artifact, and contrast it with empirical findings, now ample, that other loci shape personal COVID risks far more significantly than do ACE2 and TMPRSS2-and that variation in ACE2 and TMPRSS2 per se unlikely exacerbates any net population disparity in the effects of such more risk-informative loci.

摘要

在 SARS-CoV2 大流行早期,Hou 等人在本刊(BMC Med 18:216, 2020)中解释了公众基因型数据,通过功能预测工具运行这些数据,表明特定人群的成员携带 ACE2 和 TMPRSS2 基因中潜在增加 COVID 风险的变异体的频率远高于其他人群的成员。除了依赖预测而不是临床结果,以及关注即使联合起来也太罕见而无法代表人群成员的变异体之外,他们的说法错误地将一个众所周知的假象(即大样本比小样本揭示更多的人群变异体)视为在这两个基因中显示出真实且一致的人群差异,而不是它们共享数据源中偏向性的人群抽样。我们解释了这种假象,并将其与现在大量的经验发现进行了对比,这些发现表明,其他基因座对个人 COVID 风险的影响要大得多,而 ACE2 和 TMPRSS2 本身不太可能加剧这些更具风险信息的基因座对任何净人群差异的影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/252a/11346279/9c45cbae1c57/12916_2024_3539_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验