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.

Searching for a minimal set of behaviors for autism detection through feature selection-based machine learning.

Although the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has risen sharply in the last few years reaching 1 in 68, the average age of diagnosis in the United States remains close to 4--well past the developmental window when early intervention has the largest gains. This emphasizes the importance of developing accurate methods to detect risk faster than the current standards of care. In the present study, we used machine learning to evaluate one of the best and most widely used instruments for clinical assessment of ASD, the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) to test whether only a subset of behaviors can differentiate between children on and off the autism spectrum. ADOS relies on behavioral observation in a clinical setting and consists of four modules, with module 2 reserved for individuals with some vocabulary and module 3 for higher levels of cognitive functioning. We ran eight machine learning algorithms using stepwise backward feature selection on score sheets from modules 2 and 3 from 4540 individuals. We found that 9 of the 28 behaviors captured by items from module 2, and 12 of the 28 behaviors captured by module 3 are sufficient to detect ASD risk with 98.27% and 97.66% accuracy, respectively. A greater than 55% reduction in the number of behaviorals with negligible loss of accuracy across both modules suggests a role for computational and statistical methods to streamline ASD risk detection and screening. These results may help enable development of mobile and parent-directed methods for preliminary risk evaluation and/or clinical triage that reach a larger percentage of the population and help to lower the average age of detection and diagnosis.

Testing the accuracy of an observation-based classifier for rapid detection of autism risk.

Current approaches for diagnosing autism have high diagnostic validity but are time consuming and can contribute to delays in arriving at an official diagnosis. In a pilot study, we used machine learning to derive a classifier that represented a 72% reduction in length from the gold-standard Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic (ADOS-G), while retaining >97% statistical accuracy. The pilot study focused on a relatively small sample of children with and without autism. The present study sought to further test the accuracy of the classifier (termed the observation-based classifier (OBC)) on an independent sample of 2616 children scored using ADOS from five data repositories and including both spectrum (n=2333) and non-spectrum (n=283) individuals. We tested OBC outcomes against the outcomes provided by the original and current ADOS algorithms, the best estimate clinical diagnosis, and the comparison score severity metric associated with ADOS-2. The OBC was significantly correlated with the ADOS-G (r=-0.814) and ADOS-2 (r=-0.779) and exhibited >97% sensitivity and >77% specificity in comparison to both ADOS algorithm scores. The correspondence to the best estimate clinical diagnosis was also high (accuracy=96.8%), with sensitivity of 97.1% and specificity of 83.3%. The correlation between the OBC score and the comparison score was significant (r=-0.628), suggesting that the OBC provides both a classification as well as a measure of severity of the phenotype. These results further demonstrate the accuracy of the OBC and suggest that reductions in the process of detecting and monitoring autism are possible.