Table 3.
Logistic regression model for anosmia and ageusia outcomes.
| Outcome | Variable | Case | Control | p value | OR CI (95%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | mean (sd) or % | N | mean (sd) or % | ||||
| Anosmia | Age | 18 | 55.44 (10.33) | 84 | 54.04 (15.43) | 0.916 | – |
| ACE1 ΔCT | 7 | 11.17 (5.25) | 75 | 10.77 (3.85) | 0.835 | – | |
| ACE2 ΔCT | 9 | 15.09 (5.82) | 79 | 13.59 (4.75) | 0.063 | ||
| TMPRSS2 ΔCT | 9 | 13.11 (4.99) | 79 | 8.17 (4.59) | 0.068 | ||
| Sex (Male) | 7 | 0.39 | 41 | 0.49 | 0.446 | ||
| rs4646994 Codominance DD | 5 | 0.27 | 35 | 0.43 | – | – | |
| rs4646994 Codominance DI | 11 | 0.61 | 29 | 0.35 | 0.101 | – | |
| rs4646994 Codominance II | 2 | 0.12 | 18 | 0.22 | 0.777 | – | |
| rs4646994 I allele dominance (DI + II) | 13 | 0.73 | 47 | 0.57 | 0.248 | – | |
| rs4646994 D allele dominance (DD + DI) | 16 | 0.88 | 64 | 0.78 | 0.308 | – | |
| Ageusia | Age | 10 | 54.80 (9.41) | 92 | 55.15 (15.11) | 0.942 | |
| ACE1 ΔCT | 7 | 11.14 (6.09) | 75 | 10.81 (3.83) | 0.788 | ||
| ACE2 ΔCT | 9 | 17.16 (4.41) | 79 | 13.37 (4.93) | 0.012 | 1.35 (1.098-1.775) | |
| TMPRSS2 ΔCT | 9 | 13.63 (5.63) | 79 | 8.58 (4.67) | 0.074 | ||
| Sex (Male) | 4 | 0.4 | 44 | 0.48 | 0.639 | – | |
| rs4646994 Codominance DD | 3 | 0.3 | 37 | 0.41 | – | – | |
| rs4646994 Codominance DI | 7 | 0.7 | 33 | 0.37 | 0.188 | – | |
| rs4646994 Codominance II | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0.22 | 0.994 | – | |
| rs4646994 I allele dominance (DI + II) | 7 | 0.7 | 53 | 0.59 | 0.5 | – | |
| rs4646994 D allele dominance (DD + DI) | 10 | 1 | 70 | 0.78 | 0.991 | – | |
sd, standard deviation; OR, Odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; ΔCT, cycle threshold rate; exploring the variables age, sex rs4646994 polymorphism and ACE1, ACE2 and TMPRSS2 genes expression levels for the presence (yes/case) or absence (no/control) of anosmia or ageusia. The variable “DD +DI” corresponds to the dominance of the D allele and the variable “DI +II” corresponds to the dominance of the I allele.