Why the study?
Severe COVID-19 disproportionately affects patients with endothelial dysfunction, prompting the proposal of elevated circulating endothelin-1 as a potential biomarker and prognostic tool for high-risk disease severity.
Does elevated circulating endothelin-1 predict high-risk COVID-19 severity?
Does elevated circulating endothelin-1 predict high-risk COVID-19 severity?
The paper hypothesizes that elevated circulating endothelin-1 could serve as a biomarker for predicting severe COVID-19, given its role in endothelial dysfunction.
Endotheliitis-targeted nanomedicine merits exploration in high-risk COVID-19; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
There is a disproportionately higher rate of adverse outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients of male sex, select ethnicity, and individuals with obesity and those that tend to have endothelial dysfunction (e.g., hypertensives, diabetics and individuals with coronary heart disease and respiratory system diseases). Endotheliitis across vascular beds of multiple organs, thrombosis and ischaemia are among common pathological features of severe COVID-19 cases. Endothelin-1 (ET-1) is the most potent vasoconstrictor of the human cardiovascular system and a culprit of endothelial dysfunction. Elevated circulating ET-1 levels are a predictor of cardiovascular disease status and have been correlated with racial/ethnic differences in microvascular and macrovascular diseases severity and prognosis as well as with old age associated endothelial dysfunction. Here, we propose elevated circulating ET-1 levels as a plausible biomarker and prognostic tool in predicting individuals at high risk of developing severe COVID-19. In addition to this, we also propose ET-1 gene variants and expression patterns might also cause predisposition for an increased risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection severity in some individuals and/or populations. READ THE ARTICLE (https://doi.org/10.33218/001c.13525)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Farhangrazi et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: