Towards human exploration of space: The THESEUS review series on immunology research priorities

Dysregulation of the immune system occurs during spaceflight and may represent a crew health risk during exploration missions because astronauts are challenged by many stressors. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the biology of immune modulation under spaceflight conditions in order to be able to maintain immune homeostasis under such challenges. In the framework of the THESEUS project whose aim was to develop an integrated life sciences research roadmap regarding human space exploration, experts working in the field of space immunology, and related disciplines, established a questionnaire sent to scientists around the world. From the review of collected answers, they deduced a list of key issues and provided several recommendations such as a maximal exploitation of currently available resources on Earth and in space, and to increase increments duration for some ISS crew members to 12 months or longer. These recommendations should contribute to improve our knowledge about spaceflight effects on the immune system and the development of countermeasures that, beyond astronauts, could have a societal impact

Stochastic upscaling of hydrodynamic dispersion and retardation factor in a physically and chemically heterogeneous tropical soil

[EN] Stochastic upscaling of flow and reactive solute transport in a tropical soil is performed using real data collected in the laboratory. Upscaling of hydraulic conductivity, longitudinal hydrodynamic dispersion, and retardation factor were done using three different approaches of varying complexity. How uncertainty propagates after upscaling was also studied. The results show that upscaling must be taken into account if a good reproduction of the flow and transport behavior of a given soil is to be attained when modeled at larger than laboratory scales. The results also show that arrival time uncertainty was well reproduced after solute transport upscaling. This work represents a first demonstration of flow and reactive transport upscaling in a soil based on laboratory data. It also shows how simple upscaling methods can be incorporated into daily modeling practice using commercial flow and transport codes.The authors thank the financial support by the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) (Project 401441/2014-8). The doctoral fellowship award to the first author by the Coordination of Improvement of Higher Level Personnel (CAPES) is acknowledged. The first author also thanks the international mobility grant awarded by CNPq, through the Sciences Without Borders program (Grant Number: 200597/2015-9). The international mobility grant awarded by Santander Mobility in cooperation with the University of Sao Paulo is also acknowledged. DHI-WASI is gratefully thanked for providing a FEFLOW license.Almeida De-Godoy, V.; Zuquette, L.; Gómez-Hernández, JJ. (2019). Stochastic upscaling of hydrodynamic dispersion and retardation factor in a physically and chemically heterogeneous tropical soil. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment. 33(1):201-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-018-1624-zS201216331Ahuja LR, Naney JW, Green RE, Nielsen DR (1984) Macroporosity to characterize spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity and effects of land management. Soil Sci Soc Am J 48:699. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800040001xBellin A, Lawrence AE, Rubin Y (2004) Models of sub-grid variability in numerical simulations of solute transport in heterogeneous porous formations: three-dimensional flow and effect of pore-scale dispersion. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 18:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-003-0164-2Brent RP (1973) Algorithms for minimization without derivatives. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsBrusseau ML (1998) Non-ideal transport of reactive solutes in heterogeneous porous media: 3. model testing and data analysis using calibration versus prediction. J Hydrol 209:147–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00121-8Brusseau ML, Srivastava R (1999) Nonideal transport of reactive solutes in heterogeneous porous media: 4. Analysis of the cape cod natural-gradient field experiment. Water Resour Res 35:1113–1125. https://doi.org/10.1029/1998WR900019Brutsaert W (1967) Some methods of calculating unsaturated permeability. Trans ASAE 10:400–404Cadini F, De Sanctis J, Bertoli I, Zio E (2013) Upscaling of a dual-permeability Monte Carlo simulation model for contaminant transport in fractured networks by genetic algorithm parameter identification. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 27:505–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-012-0595-8Cambardella CA, Moorman TB, Parkin TB, Karlen DL, Novak JM, Turco RF, Konopka AE (1994) Field-scale variability of soil properties in central iowa soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:1501. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1994.03615995005800050033xCapilla JE, Rodrigo J, Gómez-Hernández JJ (1999) Simulation of non-Gaussian transmissivity fields honoring piezometric data and integrating soft and secondary information. Math Geol 31:907–927. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007580902175Cassiraga EF, Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2005) Performance assessment of solute transport upscaling methods in the context of nuclear waste disposal. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42:756–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2005.03.013Corey AT (1977) Mechanics of heterogeneous fluids in porous media. Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, CO, p 259Dagan G (1989) Flow and transport in porous formations. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75015-1Dagan G (2004) On application of stochastic modeling of groundwater flow and transport. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-004-0191-7de Azevedo AAB, Pressinotti MMN, Massoli M (1981) Sedimentological studies of the Botucatu and Pirambóia formations in the region of Santa Rita do Passa Quatro (In portuguese). Rev do Inst Geológico 2:31–38. https://doi.org/10.5935/0100-929X.19810003Deng H, Dai Z, Wolfsberg AV, Ye M, Stauffer PH, Lu Z, Kwicklis E (2013) Upscaling retardation factor in hierarchical porous media with multimodal reactive mineral facies. Chemosphere 91:248–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.10.105Diersch H-JG (2014) Finite element modeling of flow, mass and heat transport in porous and fractured media. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38739-5Dippenaar MA (2014) Porosity reviewed: quantitative multi-disciplinary understanding, recent advances and applications in vadose zone hydrology. Geotech Geol Eng 32:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-013-9704-9Fagundes JRT, Zuquette LV (2011) Sorption behavior of the sandy residual unconsolidated materials from the sandstones of the Botucatu Formation, the main aquifer of Brazil. Environ Earth Sci 62:831–845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0570-yFenton GA, Griffiths DV (2008) Risk assessment in geotechnical engineering. Wiley, p 463Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2007) Impact of upscaling on solute transport: Traveltimes, scale dependence of dispersivity, and propagation of uncertainty. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004727Fernàndez-Garcia D, Llerar-Meza G, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2009) Upscaling transport with mass transfer models: mean behavior and propagation of uncertainty. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR007764Feyen L, Gómez-Hernández JJ, Ribeiro PJ, Beven KJ, De Smedt F (2003a) A Bayesian approach to stochastic capture zone delineation incorporating tracer arrival times, conductivity measurements, and hydraulic head observations. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001544Feyen L, Ribeiro PJ, Gómez-Hernández JJ, Beven KJ, De Smedt F (2003b) Bayesian methodology for stochastic capture zone delineation incorporating transmissivity measurements and hydraulic head observations. J Hydrol 271:156–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00314-1Forsythe GE, Malcolm MA, Moler CB (1976) Computer methods for mathematical computations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, p 259Freeze R, Cherry J (1979) Groundwater. PrenticeHall Inc, Englewood cliffs, p 604Frippiat CC, Holeyman AE (2008) A comparative review of upscaling methods for solute transport in heterogeneous porous media. J Hydrol 362:150–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.08.015Fu J, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2009) Uncertainty assessment and data worth in groundwater flow and mass transport modeling using a blocking Markov chain Monte Carlo method. J Hydrol 364:328–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.11.014Gelhar LW, Axness CL (1983) Three-dimensional stochastic analysis of macrodispersion in aquifers. Water Resour Res 19:161–180. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR019i001p00161Gelhar LW, Welty C, Rehfeldt KR (1992) A critical review of data on field-scale dispersion in aquifers. Water Resour Res 28:1955–1974. https://doi.org/10.1029/92WR00607Giacheti HL, Rohm SA, Nogueira JB, Cintra JCA (1993) Geotechnical properties of the Cenozoic sediment (in protuguese). In: Albiero JH, Cintra JCA (eds) Soil from the interior of São Paulo. ABMS, Sao Paulo, pp 143–175Gómez-Hernandez JJ (1990) A stochastic approach to the simulation of block conductivity fields conditional upon data measured at a smaller scale. Stanford University, StanfordGómez-Hernández JJ, Gorelick SM (1989) Effective groundwater model parameter values: influence of spatial variabiity of hydraulic conductivity, leackance, and recharge. Water Resour Res 25:405–419Gómez-Hernández JJ, Journel A (1993) Joint sequential simulation of multigaussian fields. In: Geostatistics Tróia’92. pp 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1739-5_8Gómez-Hernández JJ, Wen X-H (1994) Probabilistic assessment of travel times in groundwater modeling. Stoch Hydrol Hydraul 8:19–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01581389Gómez-Hernández JJ, Fu J, Fernandez-Garcia D (2006) Upscaling retardation factors in 2-D porous media. In: Bierkens MFP, Gehrels JC, Kovar K (eds) Calibration and reliability in groundwater modelling: from uncertainty to decision making: proceedings of the ModelCARE 2005 conference held in The Hague, The Netherlands, 6–9 June, 2005. IAHS Publication, pp 130–136Goovaerts P (1999) Geostatistics in soil science: state-of-the-art and perspectives. Geoderma 89:1–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(98)00078-0Jarvis NJ (2007) A review of non-equilibrium water fl ow and solute transport in soil macropores: principles, controlling factors and consequences for water quality. Eur J Soil Sci 58:523–546. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss2011-050Jellali S, Diamantopoulos E, Kallali H, Bennaceur S, Anane M, Jedidi N (2010) Dynamic sorption of ammonium by sandy soil in fixed bed columns: evaluation of equilibrium and non-equilibrium transport processes. J Environ Manag 91:897–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.11.006Journel AG, Gomez-Hernandez JJ (1993) Stochastic imaging of the wilmington clastic sequence. SPE Form Eval 8:33–40. https://doi.org/10.2118/19857-PAJournel A, Deutsch C, Desbarats A (1986) Power averaging for block effective permeability. Proc SPE Calif Reg Meet. https://doi.org/10.2118/15128-MSKronberg BI, Fyfe WS, Leonardos OH, Santos AM (1979) The chemistry of some Brazilian soils: element mobility during intense weathering. Chem Geol 24:211–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2541(79)90124-4Lake LW (1988) The origins of anisotropy (includes associated papers 18394 and 18458). J Pet Technol 40:395–396. https://doi.org/10.2118/17652-PALawrence AE, Rubin Y (2007) Block-effective macrodispersion for numerical simulations of sorbing solute transport in heterogeneous porous formations. Adv Water Resour 30:1272–1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2006.11.005Lemke LD, Barrack WA II, Abriola LM, Goovaerts P (2004) Matching solute breakthrough with deterministic and stochastic aquifer models. Groundwater 42:920–934Li L, Zhou H, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2011a) A comparative study of three-dimensional hydraulic conductivity upscaling at the macro-dispersion experiment (MADE) site, Columbus Air Force Base, Mississippi (USA). J Hydrol 404:278–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.05.001Li L, Zhou H, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2011b) Transport upscaling using multi-rate mass transfer in three-dimensional highly heterogeneous porous media. Adv Water Resour 34:478–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.01.001Logsdon Keller KE, Moorman TB (2002) Measured and predicted solute leaching from multiple undisturbed soil columns. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:686–695. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2002.6860Lourens A, van Geer FC (2016) Uncertainty propagation of arbitrary probability density functions applied to upscaling of transmissivities. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 30:237–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-015-1075-8Mahapatra IC, Singh KN, Pillai KG, Bapat SR (1985) Rice soils and their management. Indian J Agron 30:R1–R41Morakinyo JA, Mackay R (2006) Geostatistical modelling of ground conditions to support the assessment of site contamination. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 20:106–118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-005-0015-4Moslehi M, de Barros FPJ, Ebrahimi F, Sahimi M (2016) Upscaling of solute transport in disordered porous media by wavelet transformations. Adv Water Resour 96:180–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2016.07.013Osinubi KJ, Nwaiwu CM (2005) Hydraulic conductivity of compacted lateritic soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 131:1034–1041. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:8(1034)Remy N (2004) SGeMS: stanford geostatistical modeling software. Softw Man. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-3610-1_89Renard P, de Marsily G (1997) Calculating equivalent permeability: a review. Adv Water Resour 20:253–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(96)00050-4Robin MJL, Sudicky EA, Gillham RW, Kachanoski RG (1991) Spatial variability of strontium distribution coefficients and their correlation with hydraulic conductivity in the Canadian forces base borden aquifer. Water Resour Res 27:2619–2632. https://doi.org/10.1029/91WR01107Salamon P, Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2007) Modeling tracer transport at the MADE site: the importance of heterogeneity. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005522Sánchez-Vila X, Carrera J, Girardi JP (1996) Scale effects in transmissivity. J Hydrol 183:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)80031-XScheibe T, Yabusaki S (1998) Scaling of flow and transport behavior in heterogeneous groundwater systems. Adv Water Resour 22:223–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(98)00014-1Selvadurai PA, Selvadurai APS (2014) On the effective permeability of a heterogeneous porous medium: the role of the geometric mean. Philos Mag 94:2318–2338. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786435.2014.913111Shackelford CD (1994) Critical concepts for column testing. J Geotech Eng 120:1804–1828. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(95)96996-OŠimůnek J, van Genuchten MT, Šejna M, Toride N, Leij FJ (1999) The STANMOD computer software for evaluating solute transport in porous media using analytical solutions of convection-dispersion equation. Riverside, CaliforniaTaskinen A, Sirviö H, Bruen M (2008) Modelling effects of spatial variability of saturated hydraulic conductivity on autocorrelated overland flow data: linear mixed model approach. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 22:67–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-006-0099-5Tuli A, Hopmans JW, Rolston DE, Moldrup P (2005) Comparison of air and water permeability between disturbed and undisturbed soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:1361. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.0332Tyukhova AR, Willmann M (2016) Conservative transport upscaling based on information of connectivity. Water Resour Res 52:6867–6880. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR018331van Genuchten MTh (1980) Determining transport parameters from solute displacement experiments. Research Report 118. U.S. Salinity Lab., Riverside, CAVanderborght J, Timmerman A, Feyen J (2000) Solute transport for steady-state and transient flow in soils with and without macropores. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:1305–1317. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2000.6441305xVanmarcke E (2010) Random fields: analysis and synthesis. World Scientific. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p 364Vishal V, Leung JY (2017) Statistical scale-up of 3D particle-tracking simulation for non-Fickian dispersive solute transport modeling. Environ Res Risk Assess, Stoch. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-017-1501-1Wen X-H, Gómez-Hernández JJ (1996) Upscaling hydraulic conductivities in heterogeneous media: an overview. J Hydrol 183:ix–xxxii. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)80030-8Wen XH, Gómez-Hernández JJ (1998) Numerical modeling of macrodispersion in heterogeneous media: a comparison of multi-Gaussian and non-multi-Gaussian models. J Contam Hydrol 30:129–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7722(97)00035-1Wen XH, Capilla JE, Deutsch CV, Gómez-Hernández JJ, Cullick AS (1999) A program to create permeability fields that honor single-phase flow rate and pressure data. Comput Geosci 25:217–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-3004(98)00126-5Wilding LP, Drees LR (1983) Spatial variability and pedology. In: Wilding LP, Smeck NE, Hall GF (eds) Pedogenesis and soil taxonomy: the soil orders. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 83–116Willmann M, Carrera J, Guadagnini A (2006) Block-upscaling of transport in heterogeneous aquifers. h2ogeo.upc.edu 1–7Xu Z, Meakin P (2013) Upscaling of solute transport in heterogeneous media with non-uniform flow and dispersion fields. Appl Math Model 37:8533–8542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.03.070Zech A, Attinger S, Cvetkovic V, Dagan G, Dietrich P, Fiori A, Rubin Y, Teutsch G (2015) Is unique scaling of aquifer macrodispersivity supported by field data? Water Resour Res 51:7662–7679. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017220Zhou H, Li L, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2010) Three-dimensional hydraulic conductivity upscaling in groundwater modeling. Comput Geosci 36:1224–1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2010.03.008Zhou H, Li L, Hendricks Franssen H-J, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2012) Pattern recognition in a bimodal aquifer using the normal-score ensemble Kalman filter. Math Geosci 44:169–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11004-011-9372-

Immune System Dysregulation During Spaceflight: Potential Countermeasures for Deep Space Exploration Missions

Recent studies have established that dysregulation of the human immune system and the reactivation of latent herpesviruses persists for the duration of a 6-month orbital spaceflight. It appears certain aspects of adaptive immunity are dysregulated during flight, yet some aspects of innate immunity are heightened. Interaction between adaptive and innate immunity also seems to be altered. Some crews experience persistent hypersensitivity reactions during flight. This phenomenon may, in synergy with extended duration and galactic radiation exposure, increase specific crew clinical risks during deep space exploration missions. The clinical challenge is based upon both the frequency of these phenomena in multiple crewmembers during low earth orbit missions and the inability to predict which specific individual crewmembers will experience these changes. Thus, a general countermeasure approach that offers the broadest possible coverage is needed. The vehicles, architecture, and mission profiles to enable such voyages are now under development. These include deployment and use of a cis-Lunar station (mid 2020s) with possible Moon surface operations, to be followed by multiple Mars flyby missions, and eventual human Mars surface exploration. Current ISS studies will continue to characterize physiological dysregulation associated with prolonged orbital spaceflight. However, sufficient information exists to begin consideration of both the need for, and nature of, specific immune countermeasures to ensure astronaut health. This article will review relevant in-place operational countermeasures onboard ISS and discuss a myriad of potential immune countermeasures for exploration missions. Discussion points include nutritional supplementation and functional foods, exercise and immunity, pharmacological options, the relationship between bone and immune countermeasures, and vaccination to mitigate herpes (and possibly other) virus risks. As the immune system has sentinel connectivity within every other physiological system, translational effects must be considered for all potential immune countermeasures. Finally, we shall discuss immune countermeasures in the context of their individualized implementation or precision medicine, based on crewmember specific immunological biases

Age-dependent impact of the major common genetic risk factor for COVID-19 on severity and mortality

AG has received support by NordForsk Nordic Trial Alliance (NTA) grant, by Academy of Finland Fellow grant N. 323116 and the Academy of Finland for PREDICT consortium N. 340541. The Richards research group is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) (365825 and 409511), the Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI), the NIH Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Genome Québec, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the McGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity and the Fonds de Recherche Québec Santé (FRQS). TN is supported by a research fellowship of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists. GBL is supported by a CIHR scholarship and a joint FRQS and Québec Ministry of Health and Social Services scholarship. JBR is supported by an FRQS Clinical Research Scholarship. Support from Calcul Québec and Compute Canada is acknowledged. TwinsUK is funded by the Welcome Trust, the Medical Research Council, the European Union, the National Institute for Health Research-funded BioResource and the Clinical Research Facility and Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy’s and St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King’s College London. The Biobanque Québec COVID19 is funded by FRQS, Genome Québec and the Public Health Agency of Canada, the McGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity and the Fonds de Recherche Québec Santé. These funding agencies had no role in the design, implementation or interpretation of this study. The COVID19-Host(a)ge study received infrastructure support from the DFG Cluster of Excellence 2167 “Precision Medicine in Chronic Inflammation (PMI)” (DFG Grant: “EXC2167”). The COVID19-Host(a)ge study was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the framework of the Computational Life Sciences funding concept (CompLS grant 031L0165). Genotyping in COVID19-Host(a)ge was supported by a philantropic donation from Stein Erik Hagen. The COVID GWAs, Premed COVID-19 study (COVID19-Host(a)ge_3) was supported by "Grupo de Trabajo en Medicina Personalizada contra el COVID-19 de Andalucia"and also by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CIBERehd and CIBERER). Funding comes from COVID-19-GWAS, COVID-PREMED initiatives. Both of them are supported by "Consejeria de Salud y Familias" of the Andalusian Government. DMM is currently funded by the the Andalussian government (Proyectos Estratégicos-Fondos Feder PE-0451-2018). The Columbia University Biobank was supported by Columbia University and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH, through Grant Number UL1TR001873. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or Columbia University. The SPGRX study was supported by the Consejería de Economía, Conocimiento, Empresas y Universidad #CV20-10150. The GEN-COVID study was funded by: the MIUR grant “Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2020” to the Department of Medical Biotechnologies University of Siena, Italy; the “Intesa San Paolo 2020 charity fund” dedicated to the project NB/2020/0119; and philanthropic donations to the Department of Medical Biotechnologies, University of Siena for the COVID-19 host genetics research project (D.L n.18 of March 17, 2020). Part of this research project is also funded by Tuscany Region “Bando Ricerca COVID-19 Toscana” grant to the Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Senese (CUP I49C20000280002). Authors are grateful to: the CINECA consortium for providing computational resources; the Network for Italian Genomes (NIG) (http://www.nig.cineca.it) for its support; the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative (https://www.covid19hg.org/); the Genetic Biobank of Siena, member of BBMRI-IT, Telethon Network of Genetic Biobanks (project no. GTB18001), EuroBioBank, and RD-Connect, for managing specimens. Genetics against coronavirus (GENIUS), Humanitas University (COVID19-Host(a)ge_4) was supported by Ricerca Corrente (Italian Ministry of Health), intramural funding (Fondazione Humanitas per la Ricerca). The generous contribution of Banca Intesa San Paolo and of the Dolce&Gabbana Fashion Firm is gratefully acknowledged. Data acquisition and sample processing was supported by COVID-19 Biobank, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Milano; LV group was supported by MyFirst Grant AIRC n.16888, Ricerca Finalizzata Ministero della Salute RF-2016-02364358, Ricerca corrente Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, the European Union (EU) Programme Horizon 2020 (under grant agreement No. 777377) for the project LITMUS- “Liver Investigation: Testing Marker Utility in Steatohepatitis”, Programme “Photonics” under grant agreement “101016726” for the project “REVEAL: Neuronal microscopy for cell behavioural examination and manipulation”, Fondazione Patrimonio Ca’ Granda “Liver Bible” PR-0361. DP was supported by Ricerca corrente Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, CV PREVITAL “Strategie di prevenzione primaria nella popolazione Italiana” Ministero della Salute, and Associazione Italiana per la Prevenzione dell’Epatite Virale (COPEV). Genetic modifiers for COVID-19 related illness (BeLCovid_1) was supported by the "Fonds Erasme". The Host genetics and immune response in SARS-Cov-2 infection (BelCovid_2) study was supported by grants from Fondation Léon Fredericq and from Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique (FNRS). The INMUNGEN-CoV2 study was funded by the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. KUL is supported by the German Research Foundation (LU 1944/3-1) SweCovid is funded by the SciLifeLab/KAW national COVID-19 research program project grant to Michael Hultström (KAW 2020.0182) and the Swedish Research Council to Robert Frithiof (2014-02569 and 2014-07606). HZ is supported by Jeansson Stiftelser, Magnus Bergvalls Stiftelse. The COMRI cohort is funded by Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. Genotyping for the COMRI cohort was performed and funded by the Genotyping Laboratory of Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland FIMM Technology Centre, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. These funding agencies had no role in the design, implementation or interpretation of this study.Background: There is considerable variability in COVID-19 outcomes amongst younger adults—and some of this variation may be due to genetic predisposition. We characterized the clinical implications of the major genetic risk factor for COVID-19 severity, and its age-dependent effect, using individual-level data in a large international multi-centre consortium. Method: The major common COVID-19 genetic risk factor is a chromosome 3 locus, tagged by the marker rs10490770. We combined individual level data for 13,424 COVID-19 positive patients (N=6,689 hospitalized) from 17 cohorts in nine countries to assess the association of this genetic marker with mortality, COVID-19-related complications and laboratory values. We next examined if the magnitude of these associations varied by age and were independent from known clinical COVID-19 risk factors. Findings: We found that rs10490770 risk allele carriers experienced an increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1·4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1·2–1·6) and COVID-19 related mortality (HR 1·5, 95%CI 1·3–1·8). Risk allele carriers had increased odds of several COVID-19 complications: severe respiratory failure (odds ratio [OR] 2·0, 95%CI 1·6-2·6), venous thromboembolism (OR 1·7, 95%CI 1·2-2·4), and hepatic injury (OR 1·6, 95%CI 1·2-2·0). Risk allele carriers ≤ 60 years had higher odds of death or severe respiratory failure (OR 2·6, 95%CI 1·8-3·9) compared to those > 60 years OR 1·5 (95%CI 1·3-1·9, interaction p-value=0·04). Amongst individuals ≤ 60 years who died or experienced severe respiratory COVID-19 outcome, we found that 31·8% (95%CI 27·6-36·2) were risk variant carriers, compared to 13·9% (95%CI 12·6-15·2%) of those not experiencing these outcomes. Prediction of death or severe respiratory failure among those ≤ 60 years improved when including the risk allele (AUC 0·82 vs 0·84, p=0·016) and the prediction ability of rs10490770 risk allele was similar to, or better than, most established clinical risk factors. Interpretation: The major common COVID-19 risk locus on chromosome 3 is associated with increased risks of morbidity and mortality—and these are more pronounced amongst individuals ≤ 60 years. The effect on COVID-19 severity was similar to, or larger than most established risk factors, suggesting potential implications for clinical risk management.Academy of Finland Fellow grant N. 323116Academy of Finland for PREDICT consortium N. 340541.Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) (365825 and 409511)Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General HospitalCanadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI)NIH FoundationCancer Research UKGenome QuébecPublic Health Agency of CanadaMcGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity and the Fonds de Recherche Québec Santé (FRQS)Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young ScientistsCIHR scholarship and a joint FRQS and Québec Ministry of Health and Social Services scholarshipFRQS Clinical Research ScholarshipCalcul QuébecCompute CanadaWelcome TrustMedical Research CouncEuropean UnionNational Institute for Health Research-funded BioResourceClinical Research Facility and Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy’s and St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation TrustKing’s College LondonGenome QuébecPublic Health Agency of CanadaMcGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and ImmunityFonds de Recherche Québec Santé(DFG Grant: “EXC2167”)(CompLS grant 031L0165)Stein Erik Hagen"Grupo de Trabajo en Medicina Personalizada contra el COVID-19 de Andalucia"Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CIBERehd and CIBERER)COVID-19-GWASCOVID-PREMED initiatives"Consejeria de Salud y Familias" of the Andalusian GovernmentAndalusian government (Proyectos Estratégicos-Fondos Feder PE-0451-2018)Columbia UniversityNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNIH Grant Number UL1TR001873Consejería de Economía, Conocimiento, Empresas y Universidad #CV20-10150MIUR grant “Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2020”“Intesa San Paolo 2020 charity fund” dedicated to the project NB/2020/0119Tuscany Region “Bando Ricerca COVID-19 Toscana”CINECA consortiumNetwork for Italian Genomes (NIG)COVID-19 Host Genetics InitiativeGenetic Biobank of SienaEuroBioBankRD-ConnectRicerca Corrente (Italian Ministry of Health)Fondazione Humanitas per la RicercaBanca Intesa San PaoloDolce&Gabbana Fashion FirmCOVID-19 BiobankFondazione IRCCS Cà Granda MilanoMyFirst Grant AIRC n.16888Ricerca Finalizzata Ministero della Salute RF-2016-02364358Ricerca corrente Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore PoliclinicoEuropean Union (EU) Programme Horizon 2020 (under grant agreement No. 777377)“Photonics” “101016726”Fondazione Patrimonio Ca’ Granda “Liver Bible” PR-0361CV PREVITAL “Strategie di prevenzione primaria nella popolazione Italiana” Ministero della Salute, and Associazione Italiana per la Prevenzione dell’Epatite Virale (COPEV)"Fonds Erasme"Fondation Léon FredericqFonds de la Recherche Scientifique (FNRS)Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientíficasGerman Research Foundation (LU 1944/3-1)SciLifeLab/KAW national COVID-19 research program project (KAW 2020.0182)Swedish Research Council (2014-02569 and 2014-07606)Jeansson Stiftelser, Magnus Bergvalls StiftelseTechnical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyGenotyping Laboratory of Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland FIMM Technology Centre, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finlan

Whole-genome sequencing reveals host factors underlying critical COVID-19

Critical COVID-19 is caused by immune-mediated inflammatory lung injury. Host genetic variation influences the development of illness requiring critical care1 or hospitalization2–4 after infection with SARS-CoV-2. The GenOMICC (Genetics of Mortality in Critical Care) study enables the comparison of genomes from individuals who are critically ill with those of population controls to find underlying disease mechanisms. Here we use whole-genome sequencing in 7,491 critically ill individuals compared with 48,400 controls to discover and replicate 23 independent variants that significantly predispose to critical COVID-19. We identify 16 new independent associations, including variants within genes that are involved in interferon signalling (IL10RB and PLSCR1), leucocyte differentiation (BCL11A) and blood-type antigen secretor status (FUT2). Using transcriptome-wide association and colocalization to infer the effect of gene expression on disease severity, we find evidence that implicates multiple genes—including reduced expression of a membrane flippase (ATP11A), and increased expression of a mucin (MUC1)—in critical disease. Mendelian randomization provides evidence in support of causal roles for myeloid cell adhesion molecules (SELE, ICAM5 and CD209) and the coagulation factor F8, all of which are potentially druggable targets. Our results are broadly consistent with a multi-component model of COVID-19 pathophysiology, in which at least two distinct mechanisms can predispose to life-threatening disease: failure to control viral replication; or an enhanced tendency towards pulmonary inflammation and intravascular coagulation. We show that comparison between cases of critical illness and population controls is highly efficient for the detection of therapeutically relevant mechanisms of disease

SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and COVID-19 disease severity are associated with genetic variants affecting gene expression in a variety of tissues

Variability in SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and COVID-19 disease severity between individuals is partly due to genetic factors. Here, we identify 4 genomic loci with suggestive associations for SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and 19 for COVID-19 disease severity. Four of these 23 loci likely have an ethnicity-specific component. Genome-wide association study (GWAS) signals in 11 loci colocalize with expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs) associated with the expression of 20 genes in 62 tissues/cell types (range: 1:43 tissues/gene), including lung, brain, heart, muscle, and skin as well as the digestive system and immune system. We perform genetic fine mapping to compute 99% credible SNP sets, which identify 10 GWAS loci that have eight or fewer SNPs in the credible set, including three loci with one single likely causal SNP. Our study suggests that the diverse symptoms and disease severity of COVID-19 observed between individuals is associated with variants across the genome, affecting gene expression levels in a wide variety of tissue types

A Preliminary Analysis of the Immunoglobulin Genes in the African Elephant (Loxodonta africana)

The genomic organization of the IgH (Immunoglobulin heavy chain), Igκ (Immunoglobulin kappa chain), and Igλ (Immunoglobulin lambda chain) loci in the African elephant (Loxodonta africana) was annotated using available genome data. The elephant IgH locus on scaffold 57 spans over 2,974 kb, and consists of at least 112 VH gene segments, 87 DH gene segments (the largest number in mammals examined so far), six JH gene segments, a single μ, a δ remnant, and eight γ genes (α and ε genes are missing, most likely due to sequence gaps). The Igκ locus, found on three scaffolds (202, 50 and 86), contains a total of 153 Vκ gene segments, three Jκ segments, and a single Cκ gene. Two different transcriptional orientations were determined for these Vκ gene segments. In contrast, the Igλ locus on scaffold 68 includes 15 Vλ gene segments, all with the same transcriptional polarity as the downstream Jλ-Cλ cluster. These data suggest that the elephant immunoglobulin gene repertoire is highly diverse and complex. Our results provide insights into the immunoglobulin genes in a placental mammal that is evolutionarily distant from humans, mice, and domestic animals