A catalog of associations between rare coding variants and COVID-19 outcomes.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), a respiratory illness that can result in hospitalization or death. We investigated associations between rare genetic variants and seven COVID-19 outcomes in 543,213 individuals, including 8,248 with COVID-19. After accounting for multiple testing, we did not identify any clear associations with rare variants either exome-wide or when specifically focusing on (i) 14 interferon pathway genes in which rare deleterious variants have been reported in severe COVID-19 patients; (ii) 167 genes located in COVID-19 GWAS risk loci; or (iii) 32 additional genes of immunologic relevance and/or therapeutic potential. Our analyses indicate there are no significant associations with rare protein-coding variants with detectable effect sizes at our current sample sizes. Analyses will be updated as additional data become available, with results publicly browsable at https://rgc-covid19.regeneron.com.

Genome-wide analysis in 756,646 individuals provides first genetic evidence that ACE2 expression influences COVID-19 risk and yields genetic risk scores predictive of severe disease.

SARS-CoV-2 enters host cells by binding angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Through a genome-wide association study, we show that a rare variant (MAF = 0.3%, odds ratio 0.60, P=4.5×10-13) that down-regulates ACE2 expression reduces risk of COVID-19 disease, providing human genetics support for the hypothesis that ACE2 levels influence COVID-19 risk. Further, we show that common genetic variants define a risk score that predicts severe disease among COVID-19 cases.

Level of evidence used in recommendations by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines beyond Food and Drug Administration approvals.

BACKGROUND: A previous analysis of 113 National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) recommendations reported that NCCN frequently recommends beyond Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved indications (44 off-label recommendations) and claimed that the evidence for these recommendations was weak. METHODS: In order to determine the strength of the evidence, we carried out an in-depth re-analysis of the 44 off-label recommendations listed in the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®). RESULTS: Of the 44 off-label recommendations, 14 were later approved by the FDA and/or are supported by randomized controlled trial (RCT) data. In addition, 13 recommendations were either very minor extrapolations from the FDA label (n = 8) or were actually on-label (n = 5). Of the 17 remaining extrapolations, 8 were for mechanism-based agents applied in rare cancers or subsets with few available treatment options (median response rate = 43%), 7 were based on non-RCT data showing significant efficacy (>50% response rates), and 2 were later removed from the NCCN Guidelines because newer therapies with better activity and/or safety became available. CONCLUSION: Off-label drug use is a frequent component of care for patients with cancer in the United States. Our findings indicate that when the NCCN recommends beyond the FDA-approved indications, the strength of the evidence supporting such recommendations is robust, with a significant subset of these drugs later becoming FDA approved or supported by RCT. Recommendations without RCT data are often for mechanism-based drugs with high response rates in rare cancers or subsets without effective therapies.