Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine logoLink to Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine
. 2022 Sep 23;10(11):e2063. doi: 10.1002/mgg3.2063

Association of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphisms with the infection and severity of COVID‐19: A meta‐analysis

Md Abdul Aziz 1,2, Mohammad Safiqul Islam 2,3,✉
PMCID: PMC9538166  PMID: 36148537

Abstract

Background

ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 genetic polymorphisms could play a critical role in altering the clinical outcomes of SARS‐CoV‐2. The findings of previous studies remained inconclusive. This meta‐analysis was performed to evaluate the association and provide a more reliable outcome.

Methods

This study was completed following the updated recommendations of PRISMA using RevMan 5.4.1 statistical software.

Results

A total of 11 studies with 950 severe cases and 1573 non‐severe cases with COVID‐19 infection were included. Pooled analysis showed that ACE1 I/D polymorphism was correlated with the severity of SARS‐CoV‐2 in the DD genotype and D allele for the fixed‐effects model (OR:1.27 and OR:1.17). Besides, codominant 3, recessive, and allele models were associated with the severity of the fixed‐effects model (OR:1.35, OR:1.37, and OR:1.20) in Caucasian ethnicity. ACE2 rs2285666 was linked with the severity in codominant 3 (OR:2.63, for both random‐ and fixed effects‐models), overdominant (OR:1.97, for random‐effects model and OR:1.97, for fixed effects‐model), and recessive model (OR:0.41 for fixed‐ and random‐effects model). Allele model of rs2285666 showed a significant association in the fixed‐effects model (OR:1.61).

Conclusion

Our present meta‐analysis suggests that ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 variants may enhance the severity in SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients. Future studies are warranted to verify our findings.

Keywords: ACE1, ACE2, COVID‐19, meta‐analysis, SARS‐CoV‐2

ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 genetic polymorphisms could play a critical role in altering the clinical outcomes of SARS‐CoV‐2. A total of 11 studies with 950 severe cases and 1,573 non‐severe cases with COVID‐19 infection was included. Our present meta‐analysis suggests that ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 variants may enhance the severity in SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients.

graphic file with name MGG3-10-e2063-g001.jpg

1. INTRODUCTION

The emergence of COVID‐19 pandemic, which occurred by the novel coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2, is contemplated to be one of the most severe threats to humankind of the century due to its higher morbidity and mortality rate (Huang et al., 2020; Yamamoto et al., 2021; Zhu et al., 2020). The SARS‐CoV‐2 virus enters the host cell via the angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor. The viral spike glycoprotein interacts with the ACE2 receptor that helps to release viral RNA into the cytoplasm, establishing subsequent infection and inflammation in the lungs and other organs. Angiotensin‐converting enzyme 1 (ACE1), on the contrary, plays a reciprocal role to that of ACE2. It modulates the expression of ACE2 via regulating angiotensin II levels (Hoffmann et al., 2020; Livshits et al., 2021; Parit & Jayavel, 2021; Peng et al., 2021).

A commonly investigated gene during the COVID‐19 pandemic is the angiotensin‐converting enzyme 1 (ACE1), found on the chromosomal location 17q23.3. It comprises an insertion or a deletion (I/D) allele that forms II, ID, and DD genotypes (Rigat et al., 1990). Studies have previously reported the association between ACE1 (OMIM 106180) I/D (rs1799752) polymorphism and hypertension, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, obesity, and myocardial infarction, which are notable comorbidities leading to the severity of COVID‐19 (Gemmati et al., 2020; Lin et al., 2019; Yoo et al., 2017; Yuan et al., 2017). The ACE1 rs1799752 has been investigated extensively during the post‐COVID‐19 situation to correlate with the susceptibility of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, associated clinical outcomes, and mortality rate (Çelik et al., 2021; Delanghe et al., 2020; Gómez et al., 2020; Hatami et al., 2020; Pati et al., 2020; Saadat, 2020; Yamamoto et al., 2020). However, these studies reported inconsistent outcomes, which should be investigated more comprehensively (Gómez et al., 2020; Yamamoto et al., 2021).

Recent studies have demonstrated that single‐nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in ACE2 (OMIM 300335) could play a critical role in altering the susceptibility and clinical outcomes of SARS‐CoV‐2 by modifying the level of expression and binding affinity (Cao et al., 2020; Çelik et al., 2021; Darbani, 2020; Devaux et al., 2020; Gemmati et al., 2020; Gómez et al., 2020; Hou et al., 2020; Li, Zhou, et al., 2020; Möhlendick et al., 2021; Novelli et al., 2020). SNP rs2285666, one of the most frequently investigated polymorphisms in ACE2, is located in the splice site of intron 3 found to be associated with severities of SARS‐CoV‐2 (Cafiero et al., 2021; Gómez et al., 2020; Möhlendick et al., 2021). As of the previous line of evidence, cerebral stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), diabetes, and hypertension are correlated with rs2285666 polymorphism, the comorbidities which lead to the worse clinical outcome in COVID‐19 patients (Chen et al., 2021; Möhlendick et al., 2021; Pinheiro et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2015). A study by Celik and others (Çelik et al., 2021) failed to demonstrate any association between this SNP and severe outcomes of COVID‐19.

Given that ACE1 and ACE2 polymorphisms may be correlated with the infection and severity of COVID‐19, the present meta‐analysis aimed to systematically evaluate and validate the association of both ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 genetic polymorphisms with SARS‐CoV‐2‐infected patients based on the available data.

2. METHODS AND MATERIALS

This meta‐analysis was performed following the updated recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (PRISMA) (Page et al., 2021).

2.1. Literature search

Two authors (MAA and MSI) systematically searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Science Direct, and Google Scholar for eligible published pieces of literature through November 2021, using the following terms: COVID‐19, SARS‐CoV‐2, coronavirus, angiotensin‐converting enzyme, ACE, ACE1 I/D, ACE1 insertion–deletion, ACE2, rs1799752, rs2285666, polymorphism, and variants either as a sole form or in combination. To retrieve all available literature, the authors also checked the references from related studies. All the studies were selected independently by the authors and disagreements were resolved through discussion if needed. We did not put any specific language restrictions during database searches.

2.2. Eligibility criteria

Studies that analyzed the association of ACE1 (NG_011648.1) I/D rs1799752 and/or ACE2 (NG_012575.2) rs2285666 with the infection and/severity of COVID‐19, designed as case–control analysis, contained sufficient data of genotypes or alleles frequency for odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculation and involved human subjects were included. In contrast, studies that did not analyze ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and/or ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphisms, contained no control arm, insufficient genotypes or alleles frequency, and did not involve human subjects were excluded.

2.3. Data extraction

Both reviewers independently extracted the following information from literature using a precoded data form: name of the first author, year of study, country of publication, ethnicity, number of severe and non‐severe cases, and genotypic information. For calculating the Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE) p‐value, we used the application in https://ihg.gsf.de/cgi‐bin/hw/hwa1.pl.

2.4. Data analysis

Association of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and/or ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphisms with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and severity was considered as the major outcome of this meta‐analysis. Therefore, the ORs with 95% CIs were calculated for each study included using seven genetic association models, including allele (D vs. I), codominant 1 (DI vs. II), codominant 2 (DD vs. II), codominant 3 (DD vs. DI), dominant (DD + DI vs. II), recessive (DD vs. DI + II), and overdominant (DI vs. DD + II) models for ACE1 I/D rs1799752, and allele (G vs. A), codominant 1 (GA vs. AA), codominant 2 (GG vs. AA), codominant 3 (GG vs. GA), dominant (GG + GA vs. AA), recessive (GG vs. GA + AA), and overdominant (GA vs. GG + AA) models for ACE2 rs2285666, individually. For ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism, the subjects were classified into two subgroups based on their ethnicity as Caucasian and Asian. The pooled results were evaluated using the random‐effects model (the DerSimonian and Laird method) and the fixed‐effects model (the Mantel–Haenszel method). A p‐value of < .05 was considered statistically significant in terms of the association. In addition to this, I 2 (%) was calculated to test the heterogeneity. The probability of publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot (Duval & Tweedie, 2000) and asymmetry was analyzed through Egger's regression (Egger et al., 1997) and Begg‐Mazumdars (Begg & Mazumdar, 1994) tests. Moreover, we implemented sensitivity analysis to evaluate the influence of individual studies by deleting one study in each turn. All analyses in this study were completed using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).

3. RESULTS

Our systemic search resulted in a total of 821 records from the aforementioned electronic databases. After removal of duplicates, and screening based on the eligible criteria, 16 full‐text articles were assessed for eligibility. Due to the lack of insufficient genotype information, another 5 articles were removed, and finally, 11 studies were included in this meta‐analysis (Akbari et al., 2021; Aladag et al., 2021; Cafiero et al., 2021; Calabrese et al., 2021; Çelik et al., 2021; Gómez et al., 2020; Gunal et al., 2021; Hubacek et al., 2021; Mir et al., 2021; Möhlendick et al., 2021; Verma et al., 2021). Among these, all studies evaluated the association of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism (severe cases = 758 and non‐severe cases = 1109), while only 3 studies (Çelik et al., 2021; Gómez et al., 2020; Möhlendick et al., 2021) evaluated the association of ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphism (severe cases = 192, non‐severe cases = 464). Three studies were performed on the Asian population (Akbari et al., 2021; Mir et al., 2021; Verma et al., 2021) and 8 studies were performed on the Caucasian population (Aladag et al., 2021; Cafiero et al., 2021; Calabrese et al., 2021; Çelik et al., 2021; Gómez et al., 2020; Gunal et al., 2021; Hubacek et al., 2021; Möhlendick et al., 2021) for ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism (Figure 1 and Table 1).

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

PRISMA flow chart showing the process of study identification and selection.

TABLE 1.

Characteristics of the studies included in the meta‐analysis

Study ID Year Country Ethnicity Severe cases Non‐severe cases DD DI II DD DI II HWE p‐value
ACE1 I/D rs1799752
Akbari et al. 2021 Iran Asian 37 54 6 31 0 11 39 4 .001
Aladag et al. 2021 Turkey Caucasian 12 53 2 10 0 23 22 8 .478
Cafiero et al. 2021 Italy Caucasian 54 50 32 15 7 7 21 22 .587
Calabrese et al. 2021 Italy Caucasian 25 43 18 4 3 20 21 2 .227
Çelik et al. 2021 Turkey Caucasian 35 119 14 15 6 34 64 21 .334
Gomez et al. 2020 Spain Caucasian 67 137 31 31 5 44 76 17 .071
Gunal et al. 2021 Turkey Caucasian 30 60 19 2 9 26 12 22 0
Hubacek et al. 2021 Czech Republic Caucasian 245 163 51 123 71 40 87 36 .384
Mir et al. 2021 Saudi Arabia Asian 43 74 12 20 11 45 24 5 .472
Möhlendick et al. 2021 Germany Caucasian 90 207 31 40 19 74 86 47 .026
Verma et al. 2021 India Asian 120 149 30 48 42 17 58 74 .283
Total 758 1109 246 339 173 341 510 258
Study ID Year Country Ethnicity Severe cases Non‐severe cases GG GA AA GG GA AA HWE p‐value
ACE2 rs2285666
Çelik et al. 2021 Turkey Caucasian 35 120 5 6 24 23 27 70 <.001
Gomez et al. 2020 Spain Caucasian 67 137 12 3 52 18 25 94 <.001
Möhlendick et al. 2021 Germany Caucasian 90 207 4 6 80 23 34 150 <.001
Total 192 464 21 15 156 64 86 314
Open in a new tab

3.1. Association of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 with the infection and severity of COVID‐19

Pooled analysis showed that ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism was correlated with the infection and severity of SARS‐CoV‐2 in recessive and allele models for the fixed‐effects model (DD vs. DI + II: OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.02–1.59, p‐value: .031, I 2: 80.32% and D vs. I: OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02–1.35, p‐value: .025, I 2: 83.90%) (Table 2 and Figure 2). Subgroup analysis showed that codominant 3, recessive, and allele model were associated with COVID‐19 infection and severity for fixed‐effects model (DD vs. DI: OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.03–1.78, p‐value: .029, I 2: 72.44% and DD vs. DI + II: OR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.07–1.76, p‐value: .012, I 2: 76.38%, and D vs. I: OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.02–1.41, p‐value: .031, I 2: 80.10%) in Caucasian ethnicity (Table 2).

TABLE 2.

Meta‐analysis of the association of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism with the infection and severity of COVID‐19

Genetic models (ACE1 I/D rs1799752) Test of heterogeneity Test of association
Random‐effects model Fixed‐effects model
p‐value I 2 (%) OR 95% CI p‐value OR 95% CI p‐value
Overall population
DI vs. II .065 42.64 1.00 0.66–1.50 .984 1.00 0.77–1.31 .985
DD vs. II <.0001 77.84 1.46 0.73–2.91 .285 1.32 0.99–1.77 .059
DD vs. DI <.0001 74.00 1.34 0.81–2.22 .249 1.24 0.98–1.57 .077
DD + DI vs. II .0007 67.29 1.22 0.74–1.99 .436 1.16 0.91–1.49 .218
DD vs. DI + II <.0001 80.32 1.35 0.80–2.27 .263 1.27 1.02–1.59 .031
DI vs. DD + II .0086 57.71 0.90 0.64–1.27 .559 0.92 0.75–1.12 .397
D vs. I <.0001 83.90 1.24 0.86–1.80 .251 1.17 1.02–1.35 .025
Caucasian
DI vs. II .134 37.01 0.96 0.60–1.53 .860 0.92 0.67–1.26 .605
DD vs. II .001 71.20 1.65 0.82–3.30 .161 1.28 0.92–1.79 .144
DD vs. DI .0006 72.44 1.64 0.92–2.91 .092 1.35 1.03–1.78 .029
DD + DI vs. II .0165 59.15 1.30 0.77–2.19 .328 1.10 0.82–1.46 .537
DD vs. DI + II .0001 76.38 1.62 0.93–2.81 .086 1.37 1.07–1.76 .012
DI vs. DD + II .0167 59.08 0.74 0.49–1.13 .163 0.80 0.63–1.02 .068
D vs. I <.0001 80.10 1.42 0.95–2.12 .088 1.20 1.02–1.41 .031
Asian
DI vs. II .068 62.79 1.10 0.33–3.66 .877 1.23 0.76–1.99 .410
DD vs. II <.0001 90.32 1.08 0.09–1.65 .951 1.47 0.81–2.68 .209
DD vs. DI .003 82.38 0.80 0.24–2.68 .713 0.93 0.57–1.52 .772
DD + DI vs. II .002 84.42 1.06 0.18–6.32 .951 1.35 0.86–2.11 .189
DD vs. DI + II .0001 89.79 0.80 0.17–3.63 .772 0.98 0.62–1.56 .931
DI vs. DD + II .354 3.76 1.32 0.88–1.96 .175 1.31 0.89–1.92 .174
D vs. I <.0001 92.51 0.86 0.30–2.48 .783 1.11 0.85–1.45 .445
Open in a new tab

Bold p‐values indicate statistically significant.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Open in a new tab

Forest plot showing the association of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism with the infection and severity of COVID‐19.

3.2. Association of ACE2 rs2285666 with the infection and severity of COVID‐19

Pooled meta‐regression analysis of ACE2 rs2285666 with the infection and severity of COVID‐19 (Table 3 and Figure 3) showed that codominant 3 (GG vs. GA: [OR: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.45–4.75, p‐value: .001 for both random‐ and fixed‐effects models], I 2: 0%), overdominant (GG vs. GA + AA: [OR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.28–3.03, p‐value: .002 for random‐effects model and OR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.29–3.00, p‐value: .002 for fixed‐effects model], I 2: 4.70%), and recessive model (GA vs. GG + AA: [OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21–0.78, p‐value: .006 for random‐effects model and OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.23–0.74, p‐value: .003 for fixed‐effects model], I 2: 17.38%) were linked with severity of SARS‐CoV‐2 for both random‐effects and fixed‐effects models. Allele model of rs2285666 showed significant association for fixed‐effects model only (G vs. A: OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.16–2.24, p‐value: .004, I 2: 62.64%).

TABLE 3.

Meta‐analysis of the association of ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphism with the infection and severity of COVID‐19

Genetic models (ACE2 rs2285666) Test of heterogeneity Test of association
Random‐effects model Fixed‐effects model
p‐value I 2 (%) OR 95% CI p‐value OR 95% CI p‐value
GA vs. AA .134 50.34 0.58 0.19–1.77 .341 0.59 0.27–1.30 .190
GG vs. AA .163 44.94 1.48 0.69–3.17 .317 1.38 0.79–2.40 .257
GG vs. GA .374 0 2.63 1.45–4.75 .001 2.63 1.45–4.75 .001
GG + GA vs. AA .135 50.15 1.29 0.58–2.85 .531 1.19 0.69–2.06 .538
GG vs. GA + AA .350 4.70 1.97 1.28–3.03 .002 1.97 1.29–3.00 .002
GA vs. GG + AA .298 17.38 0.41 0.21–0.78 .006 0.41 0.23–0.74 .003
G vs. A .069 62.64 1.66 0.96–2.86 .068 1.61 1.16–2.24 .004
Open in a new tab

Bold p‐values indicate statistically significant.

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Open in a new tab

Forest plot showing the association of ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphism with the infection and severity of COVID‐19.

3.3. Publication bias and sensitivity analysis

Table 4 and Figure 4 depict the publication bias analysis for both ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and/or ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphisms. No statistically significant publication bias was observed from Egger's test and Begg‐Mazumdar's test (Table 4) or funnel plots (Figure 4). We also implemented sensitivity analysis in terms of the allele model for both SNPs (Figure 5), but no significant deviation was observed after excluding each study each time.

TABLE 4.

Publication bias analysis

Genetic model Publication Bias (p‐value)
Egger's test Begg‐Mazumdar's test
ACE1 I/D rs1799752
DI vs. II 0.924 0.815
DD vs. II 0.655 0.815
DD vs. DI 0.582 0.686
DD + DI vs. II 0.684 0.697
DD vs. DI + II 0.711 0.586
DI vs. DD + II 0.899 0.815
D vs. I 0.601 0.697
ACE2 rs2285666
GA vs. AA 0.449 0.117
GG vs. AA 0.256 0.117
GG vs. GA 0.686 0.602
GG + GA vs. AA 0.199 0.117
GG vs. GA + AA 0.957 0.602
GA vs. GG + AA 0.598 0.602
G vs. A 0.564 0.602
Open in a new tab

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Open in a new tab

Funnel plots in allele model: (a) ACE I/D rs1799752 (b) ACE2 rs2285666.

FIGURE 5.

FIGURE 5

Open in a new tab

Sensitivity analysis in allele model: (a) ACE I/D rs1799752 (b) ACE2 rs2285666.

4. DISCUSSION

Based on the recommendations for establishing more compact scientific evidence by Oscanoa et al. (2021), we performed the present meta‐analysis to explore the association of ACE1 and ACE2 genetic polymorphisms with the severity of SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients. Our current meta‐analysis suggests that ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 variants may increase the severity in SARS‐CoV‐2‐infected patients. Recent investigations have revealed that genetic polymorphisms in both of these genes may have a significant role in COVID‐19 severity (Calabrese et al., 2021; Cheng et al., 2020; Li, Wang et al., 2020).

The correlation of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism with the risk of various diseases has been studied previously. It was demonstrated that I/D variant can impose the risk of hypertension in African ethnicity (Mengesha et al., 2019), type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Caucasian and East‐Asian ethnicities (Zhou et al., 2010), and both hypertension and T2DM in Caucasian and Asian ethnicities (Liu et al., 2021), and chronic kidney disease in Asian hypertensive male patients (Lin et al., 2014) which are thought to get worsen during COVID‐19 (Matta et al., 2020). During the COVID‐19 pandemic, the role of this variant in the severity had also investigated by different studies. To establish comprehensive evidence, we have tried to retrieve all available studies and screened and analyzed these studies. Our analysis reported that ACE1 I/D rs1799752 polymorphism might confer the severe condition in SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients. Both DD genotype (OR: 1.27) and D allele (OR: 1.17) have demonstrated the correlation with the severity in the overall population (both Caucasian and Asian). The risk associated with the severity is also observed in the Caucasian population for DD genotype (OR: 1.35 in DD vs. DI and OR: 1.37 in DD vs. DI + II), and D allele (OR: 1.20). Studies on COVID‐19 patients also revealed that I/D rs1799752 is associated with the severity (Akbari et al., 2021; Aladag et al., 2021; Cafiero et al., 2021; Calabrese et al., 2021; Gómez et al., 2020; Gunal et al., 2021; Hubacek et al., 2021; Mir et al., 2021; Verma et al., 2021), which is consistent with our overall findings. However, two studies reported no significant association between ACE1 I/D polymorphism and COVID‐19 severity (Çelik et al., 2021; Möhlendick et al., 2021).

Genetic polymorphisms in the ACE2 gene may alter the expression level and binding affinity of SARS‐CoV‐2 in the host (Cao et al., 2020; Darbani, 2020; Gemmati et al., 2020; Hou et al., 2020). A common polymorphism in ACE2 is rs2285666, the association of which had been analyzed for the severe outcome in SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients (Cafiero et al., 2021; Çelik et al., 2021;Gómez et al., 2020; Möhlendick et al., 2021). Although it is evident that COVID‐19 comorbidities like cerebral stroke, CHD, T2DM, and hypertension are correlated to rs2285666 polymorphism (Chen et al., 2021; Pinheiro et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2015), recent studies showed conflicting outcomes. Only three studies evaluated the role of this SNP in COVID‐19 patients (Gómez et al., 2020; Möhlendick et al., 2021), among which two studies reported a statistically significant association with severe clinical outcomes, while another one did not suggest any significant correlation (Çelik et al., 2021). To provide more comprehensive evidence, we performed a meta‐analysis with these three studies, which showed that codominant 3 (GG vs. GA: OR: 2.63), overdominant (GG vs. GA + AA: OR: 1.97 (random‐effects model) and OR: 1.97 (fixed‐effects model)), and recessive model (GA vs. GG + AA: OR: 0.41 (random‐effects model), and OR: 0.41 (fixed‐effects model)) are correlated with the severity of SARS‐CoV‐2. G allele of rs2285666 was also reported to be significantly linked with the severity for the fixed‐effects model (G vs. A: OR: 1.61). Moreover, there was no notable publication bias in our analysis, and the implementation of sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of our results.

Although Oscanoa et al. (2021) performed the first meta‐analysis with ACE1 I/D polymorphism, we have performed the first meta‐analysis, including ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 variants. Besides, we have included comparatively large number studies (11 studies) with ACE1 I/D polymorphism (severe cases = 758 and non‐severe cases = 1109), with ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphism (severe cases = 192, non‐severe cases = 464) that includes population from both Caucasian and Asian ancestry. Furthermore, publication bias and sensitivity analyses validated the stability of the findings. Despite this, our study still lacks some merits. To mention, there is still no study on African or other ethnicities except Asian and Caucasian, which may somehow limit the acceptability of the overall findings. Again, the number of studies is still short to conclude any compact association. We suggest conducting a further meta‐analysis to establish the association of ACE1 rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphisms with the severity of COVID‐19.

5. CONCLUSION

The present meta‐analysis suggests that ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 variants may enhance the severity in SARS‐CoV‐2 infected patients. However, future investigations, including studies from all ethnicities and other genetic polymorphisms, are warranted to verify the actual correlation between COVID‐19 infection and subsequent severity.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Md. Abdul Aziz performed the literature search and data acquisition. Mohammad Safiqul Islam performed all the statistical analyses related to this meta‐analysis. Md. Abdul Aziz prepared the draft of the manuscript. Mohammad Safiqul Islam supervised and made substantial contributions to conception, design, data analysis, and data interpretation and revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

ETHICS STATEMENT

None required.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are thankful to the Laboratory of Pharmacogenomics and Molecular Biology, Department of Pharmacy, Noakhali Science and Technology University, Sonapur‐3814, Noakhali, Bangladesh, for their support.

Aziz, M. A. , & Islam, M. S. (2022). Association of ACE1 I/D rs1799752 and ACE2 rs2285666 polymorphisms with the infection and severity of COVID‐19: A meta‐analysis. Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine, 10, e2063. 10.1002/mgg3.2063

REFERENCES

  1. Akbari, M. , Taheri, M. , Mehrpoor, G. , Eslami, S. , Hussen, B. M. , Ghafouri‐Fard, S. , & Arefian, N. (2021). Assessment of ACE1 variants and ACE1/ACE2 expression in COVID‐19 patients. Vascular Pharmacology, 142, 106934. Advance online publication. 10.1016/j.vph.2021.106934 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Aladag, E. , Tas, Z. , Ozdemir, B. S. , Akbaba, T. H. , Akpınar, M. G. , Goker, H. , Unalan‐Altintop, T. , Inkaya, A. C. , Alp, A. , Metan, G. , Haznedaroglu, I. C. , Balci‐Peynircioglu, B. , & Sayinalp, N. (2021). Human ace D/I polymorphism could affect the clinicobiological course of COVID‐19. Journal of the Renin‐Angiotensin‐Aldosterone System: JRAAS, 2021, 5509280. 10.1155/2021/5509280 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Begg, C. B. , & Mazumdar, M. (1994). Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics, 50(4), 1088–1101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cafiero, C. , Rosapepe, F. , Palmirotta, R. , Re, A. , Ottaiano, M. P. , Benincasa, G. , Perone, R. , Varriale, E. , D'Amato, G. , Cacciamani, A. , Micera, A. , & Pisconti, S. (2021). Angiotensin system polymorphisms' in SARS‐CoV‐2 positive patients: Assessment between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients: A pilot study. Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine, 14, 621–629. 10.2147/PGPM.S303666 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Calabrese, C. , Annunziata, A. , Coppola, A. , Pafundi, P. C. , Guarino, S. , Di Spirito, V. , Maddaloni, V. , Pepe, N. , & Fiorentino, G. (2021). ACE gene I/D polymorphism and acute pulmonary embolism in COVID19 pneumonia: A potential predisposing role. Frontiers in Medicine, 7, 631148. 10.3389/fmed.2020.631148 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cao, Y. , Li, L. , Feng, Z. , Wan, S. , Huang, P. , Sun, X. , Wen, F. , Huang, X. , Ning, G. , & Wang, W. (2020). Comparative genetic analysis of the novel coronavirus (2019‐nCoV/SARS‐CoV‐2) receptor ACE2 in different populations. Cell discovery, 6, 11. 10.1038/s41421-020-0147-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Çelik, S. K. , Genç, G. C. , Pişkin, N. , Açikgöz, B. , Altinsoy, B. , İşsiz, B. K. , & Dursun, A. (2021). Polymorphisms of ACE (I/D) and ACE2 receptor gene (Rs2106809, Rs2285666) are not related to the clinical course of COVID‐19: A case study. Journal of Medical Virology, 93(10), 5947–5952. 10.1002/jmv.27160 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen, F. , Zhang, Y. , Li, X. , Li, W. , Liu, X. , & Xue, X. (2021). The impact of ACE2 polymorphisms on COVID‐19 disease: Susceptibility, severity, and therapy. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, 11, 753721. 10.3389/fcimb.2021.753721 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cheng, H. , Wang, Y. , & Wang, G. Q. (2020). Organ‐protective effect of angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 and its effect on the prognosis of COVID‐19. Journal of Medical Virology, 92(7), 726–730. 10.1002/jmv.25785 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Darbani, B. (2020). The expression and polymorphism of entry machinery for COVID‐19 in human: Juxtaposing population groups, gender, and different tissues. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(10), 3433. 10.3390/ijerph17103433 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Delanghe, J. R. , Speeckaert, M. M. , & De Buyzere, M. L. (2020). COVID‐19 infections are also affected by human ACE1 D/I polymorphism. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 58(7), 1125–1126. 10.1515/cclm-2020-0425 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Devaux, C. A. , Rolain, J. M. , & Raoult, D. (2020). ACE2 receptor polymorphism: Susceptibility to SARS‐CoV‐2, hypertension, multi‐organ failure, and COVID‐19 disease outcome. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology, and Infection, 53(3), 425–435. 10.1016/j.jmii.2020.04.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Duval, S. , & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel‐plot‐based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta‐analysis. Biometrics, 56(2), 455–463. 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Egger, M. , Davey Smith, G. , Schneider, M. , & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta‐analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 315(7109), 629–634. 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Gemmati, D. , Bramanti, B. , Serino, M. L. , Secchiero, P. , Zauli, G. , & Tisato, V. (2020). COVID‐19 and individual genetic susceptibility/receptivity: Role of ACE1/ACE2 Genes, immunity, inflammation and coagulation. might the double X‐chromosome in females be protective against SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to the single X‐chromosome in males? International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 21(10), 3474. 10.3390/ijms21103474 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Gómez, J. , Albaiceta, G. M. , García‐Clemente, M. , López‐Larrea, C. , Amado‐Rodríguez, L. , Lopez‐Alonso, I. , Hermida, T. , Enriquez, A. I. , Herrero, P. , Melón, S. , Alvarez‐Argüelles, M. E. , Boga, J. A. , Rojo‐Alba, S. , Cuesta‐Llavona, E. , Alvarez, V. , Lorca, R. , & Coto, E. (2020). Angiotensin‐converting enzymes (ACE, ACE2) gene variants and COVID‐19 outcome. Gene, 762, 145102. 10.1016/j.gene.2020.145102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gunal, O. , Sezer, O. , Ustun, G. U. , Ozturk, C. E. , Sen, A. , Yigit, S. , & Demirag, M. D. (2021). Angiotensin‐converting enzyme‐1 gene insertion/deletion polymorphism may be associated with COVID‐19 clinical severity: A prospective cohort study. Annals of Saudi Medicine, 41(3), 141–146. 10.5144/0256-4947.2021.141 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hatami, N. , Ahi, S. , Sadeghinikoo, A. , Foroughian, M. , Javdani, F. , Kalani, N. , Fereydoni, M. , Keshavarz, P. , & Hosseini, A. (2020). Worldwide ACE (I/D) polymorphism may affect COVID‐19 recovery rate: An ecological meta‐regression. Endocrine, 68(3), 479–484. 10.1007/s12020-020-02381-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hoffmann, M. , Kleine‐Weber, H. , Schroeder, S. , Krüger, N. , Herrler, T. , Erichsen, S. , Schiergens, T. S. , Herrler, G. , Wu, N. H. , Nitsche, A. , Müller, M. A. , Drosten, C. , & Pöhlmann, S. (2020). SARS‐CoV‐2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell, 181(2), 271–280.e8. 10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hou, Y. , Zhao, J. , Martin, W. , Kallianpur, A. , Chung, M. K. , Jehi, L. , Sharifi, N. , Erzurum, S. , Eng, C. , & Cheng, F. (2020). New insights into genetic susceptibility of COVID‐19: An ACE2 and TMPRSS2 polymorphism analysis. BMC Medicine, 18(1), 216. 10.1186/s12916-020-01673-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Huang, C. , Wang, Y. , Li, X. , Ren, L. , Zhao, J. , Hu, Y. , Zhang, L. , Fan, G. , Xu, J. , Gu, X. , Cheng, Z. , Yu, T. , Xia, J. , Wei, Y. , Wu, W. , Xie, X. , Yin, W. , Li, H. , Liu, M. , … Cao, B. (2020). Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet (London, England), 395(10223), 497–506. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hubacek, J. A. , Dusek, L. , Majek, O. , Adamek, V. , Cervinkova, T. , Dlouha, D. , & Adamkova, V. (2021). ACE I/D polymorphism in Czech first‐wave SARS‐CoV‐2‐positive survivors. Clinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry, 519, 206–209. 10.1016/j.cca.2021.04.024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Li, Y. , Zhou, W. , Yang, L. , & You, R. (2020). Physiological and pathological regulation of ACE2, the SARS‐CoV‐2 receptor. Pharmacological Research, 157, 104833. 10.1016/j.phrs.2020.104833 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Li, Z. , Wang, S. , Jiao, X. , & Wei, G. (2020). Genetic association of angiotensin‐converting enzyme I/D polymorphism with intracranial hemorrhage: An updated meta‐analysis of 39 case‐control studies. World Neurosurgery, 134, e1–e7. 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.06.104 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lin, C. , Yang, H. Y. , Wu, C. C. , Lee, H. S. , Lin, Y. F. , Lu, K. C. , Chu, C. M. , Lin, F. H. , Kao, S. Y. , & Su, S. L. (2014). Angiotensin‐converting enzyme insertion/deletion polymorphism contributes high risk for chronic kidney disease in Asian male with hypertension—A meta‐regression analysis of 98 observational studies. PLoS One, 9(1), e87604. 10.1371/journal.pone.0087604 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Lin, P. , Li, H. , Yu, T. , & Liu, Y. (2019). The effect of angiotensin‐converting enzyme gene polymorphisms on the clinical efficacy of perindopril prescribed for acute myocardial infarction in chinese han patients. Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers, 23(5), 316–324. 10.1089/gtmb.2018.0232 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Liu, M. , Yi, J. , & Tang, W. (2021). Association between angiotensin converting enzyme gene polymorphism and essential hypertension: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of the Renin‐Angiotensin‐Aldosterone System: JRAAS, 22(1), 1–12. 10.1177/1470320321995074 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Livshits, L. A. , Harashchenko, T. A. , Umanets, T. R. , Krasnienkov, D. S. , Gorodna, O. V. , Podolskiy, V. V. , Kaminska, T. M. , Lapshyn, V. F. , Podolskiy, V. V. , & Antipkin, Y. G. (2021). Relationship between the prevalence of ACE1 I/D polymorphism genotype II and Covid‐19 morbidity, mortality in Ukraine and in some Europe countries. Cytology and Genetics, 55(5), 427–432. 10.3103/S0095452721050054 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Matta, S. , Chopra, K. K. , & Arora, V. K. (2020). Morbidity and mortality trends of Covid 19 in top 10 countries. The Indian Journal of Tuberculosis, 67(4S), S167–S172. 10.1016/j.ijtb.2020.09.031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Mengesha, H. G. , Petrucka, P. , Spence, C. , & Tafesse, T. B. (2019). Effects of angiotensin converting enzyme gene polymorphism on hypertension in Africa: A meta‐analysis and systematic review. PLoS One, 14(2), e0211054. 10.1371/journal.pone.0211054 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Mir, M. M. , Mir, R. , Alghamdi, M. , Alsayed, B. A. , Wani, J. I. , Alharthi, M. H. , & Al‐Shahrani, A. M. (2021). Strong association of angiotensin converting enzyme‐2 gene insertion/deletion polymorphism with susceptibility to SARS‐CoV‐2, hypertension, coronary artery disease and COVID‐19 disease mortality. Journal of personalized medicine, 11(11), 1098. 10.3390/jpm11111098 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Möhlendick, B. , Schönfelder, K. , Breuckmann, K. , Elsner, C. , Babel, N. , Balfanz, P. , Dahl, E. , Dreher, M. , Fistera, D. , Herbstreit, F. , Hölzer, B. , Koch, M. , Kohnle, M. , Marx, N. , Risse, J. , Schmidt, K. , Skrzypczyk, S. , Sutharsan, S. , Taube, C. , … Kribben, A. (2021). ACE2 polymorphism and susceptibility for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and severity of COVID‐19. Pharmacogenetics and Genomics, 31(8), 165–171. 10.1097/FPC.0000000000000436 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Novelli, A. , Biancolella, M. , Borgiani, P. , Cocciadiferro, D. , Colona, V. L. , D'Apice, M. R. , Rogliani, P. , Zaffina, S. , Leonardis, F. , Campana, A. , Raponi, M. , Andreoni, M. , Grelli, S. , & Novelli, G. (2020). Analysis of ACE2 genetic variants in 131 Italian SARS‐CoV‐2‐positive patients. Human Genomics, 14(1), 29. 10.1186/s40246-020-00279-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Oscanoa, T. J. , Vidal, X. , Coto, E. , & Romero‐Ortuno, R. (2021). ACE gene I/D polymorphism and severity of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in hospitalized patients: A meta‐analysis. Arterial Hypertension, 25(3), 112–118. 10.5603/AH.a2021.0018 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Page, M. J. , McKenzie, J. E. , Bossuyt, P. M. , Boutron, I. , Hoffmann, T. C. , Mulrow, C. D. , Shamseer, L. , Tetzlaff, J. M. , Akl, E. A. , Brennan, S. E. , Chou, R. , Glanville, J. , Grimshaw, J. M. , Hróbjartsson, A. , Lalu, M. M. , Li, T. , Loder, E. W. , Mayo‐Wilson, E. , McDonald, S. , … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 372, n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Parit, R. , & Jayavel, S. (2021). Association of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin type II blockers with ACE2 overexpression in COVID‐19 comorbidities: A pathway‐based analytical study. European Journal of Pharmacology, 896, 173899. 10.1016/j.ejphar.2021.173899 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Pati, A. , Mahto, H. , Padhi, S. , & Panda, A. K. (2020). ACE deletion allele is associated with susceptibility to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and mortality rate: An epidemiological study in the Asian population. Clinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry, 510, 455–458. 10.1016/j.cca.2020.08.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Peng, R. , Wu, L. A. , Wang, Q. , Qi, J. , & Gao, G. F. (2021). Cell entry by SARS‐CoV‐2. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 46(10), 848–860. 10.1016/j.tibs.2021.06.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Pinheiro, D. S. , Santos, R. S. , Jardim, P. , Silva, E. G. , Reis, A. , Pedrino, G. R. , & Ulhoa, C. J. (2019). The combination of ACE I/D and ACE2 G8790A polymorphisms revels susceptibility to hypertension: A genetic association study in Brazilian patients. PLoS One, 14(8), e0221248. 10.1371/journal.pone.0221248 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Rigat, B. , Hubert, C. , Alhenc‐Gelas, F. , Cambien, F. , Corvol, P. , & Soubrier, F. (1990). An insertion/deletion polymorphism in the angiotensin I‐converting enzyme gene accounting for half the variance of serum enzyme levels. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 86(4), 1343–1346. 10.1172/JCI114844 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Saadat, M. (2020). No significant correlation between ACE Ins/Del genetic polymorphism and COVID‐19 infection. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 58(7), 1127–1128. 10.1515/cclm-2020-0577 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Verma, S. , Abbas, M. , Verma, S. , Khan, F. H. , Raza, S. T. , Siddiqi, Z. , Ahmad, I. , & Mahdi, F. (2021). Impact of I/D polymorphism of angiotensin‐converting enzyme 1 (ACE1) gene on the severity of COVID‐19 patients. Infection, Genetics and Evolution, 91, 104801. 10.1016/j.meegid.2021.104801 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Wu, Y. H. , Li, J. Y. , Wang, C. , Zhang, L. M. , & Qiao, H. (2017). The ACE2 G8790A polymorphism: Involvement in type 2 diabetes mellitus combined with cerebral stroke. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis, 31(2), e22033. 10.1002/jcla.22033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Yamamoto, N. , Ariumi, Y. , Nishida, N. , Yamamoto, R. , Bauer, G. , Gojobori, T. , Shimotohno, K. , & Mizokami, M. (2020). SARS‐CoV‐2 infections and COVID‐19 mortalities strongly correlate with ACE1 I/D genotype. Gene, 758, 144944. 10.1016/j.gene.2020.144944 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Yamamoto, N. , Nishida, N. , Yamamoto, R. , Gojobori, T. , Shimotohno, K. , Mizokami, M. , & Ariumi, Y. (2021). Angiotensin‐Converting Enzyme (ACE) 1 gene polymorphism and phenotypic expression of COVID‐19 symptoms. Genes, 12(10), 1572. 10.3390/genes12101572 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Yang, M. , Zhao, J. , Xing, L. , & Shi, L. (2015). The association between angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 polymorphisms and essential hypertension risk: A meta‐analysis involving 14,122 patients. Journal of the Renin‐Angiotensin‐Aldosterone System: JRAAS, 16(4), 1240–1244. 10.1177/1470320314549221 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Yoo, K. H. , Yim, H. E. , Bae, E. S. , & Hong, Y. S. (2017). Genetic contributions to childhood obesity: Association of candidate gene polymorphisms and overweight/obesity in Korean preschool children. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 32(12), 1997–2004. 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.12.1997 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Yuan, Y. , Meng, L. , Zhou, Y. , & Lu, N. (2017). Genetic polymorphism of angiotensin‐converting enzyme and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy risk: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Medicine, 96(48), e8639. 10.1097/MD.0000000000008639 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhou, J. B. , Yang, J. K. , Lu, J. K. , & An, Y. H. (2010). Angiotensin‐converting enzyme gene polymorphism is associated with type 2 diabetes: A meta‐analysis. Molecular Biology Reports, 37(1), 67–73. 10.1007/s11033-009-9648-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhu, N. , Zhang, D. , Wang, W. , Li, X. , Yang, B. , Song, J. , Zhao, X. , Huang, B. , Shi, W. , Lu, R. , Niu, P. , Zhan, F. , Ma, X. , Wang, D. , Xu, W. , Wu, G. , Gao, G. F. , Tan, W. , & China Novel Coronavirus Investigating and Research Team . (2020). A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. The New England Journal of Medicine, 382(8), 727–733. 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine are provided here courtesy of Blackwell Publishing

RESOURCES