4.1 Article

Frequency of Interleukin-6 rs1800795 (-174G/C) and rs1800797 (-597G/A) Polymorphisms in COVID-19 Patients in Turkey Who Develop Macrophage Activation Syndrome

期刊

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 74, 期 6, 页码 543-548

出版社

NATL INST INFECTIOUS DISEASES
DOI: 10.7883/yoken.JJID.2021.046

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to evaluate the relationship between interleukin-6 (IL-6) gene polymorphisms -174G/C and -597G/A and the course of COVID-19. Significant differences were found in the frequencies of the IL-6-174G/C polymorphism between the MAS and non-MAS groups, suggesting that the G allele may be a risk factor for macrophage activation syndrome.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has infected over 100 million people since it appeared in Wuhan, China, just one year ago. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between interleukin-6 (IL-6) gene polymorphisms -174G/C and -597G/A and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) course. The study included 70 patients aged 18-45 years who were diagnosed with COVID-19 in Turkey between March and November 2020 and hospitalized in our hospital. Of these, 40 patients required intensive care admission due to macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), and 30 patients did not develop MAS or acute respiratory distress syndrome. The frequencies of the IL-6-174G/C and -597G/A polymorphisms were determined. There were significant differences between the groups in terms of the -174G/C allele and genotype frequency according to the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (chi(2) = 10.029, df = 1, P = 0.002 and chi(2) = 9.998, df = 1, P = 0.002, respectively). The frequency of the GG genotype was significantly higher in the MAS group than in the non-MAS group (P = 0.002). The G allele was also significantly more frequent in the MAS group than in the non-MAS group (P = 0.032). Analysis of the -174G/C polymorphism in patients with MAS showed that the G allele may be a risk factor for increased serum IL-6 levels and progression to MAS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据