| Literature DB >> 32752138 |
Abby C Lee1,2, Jaideep Chakladar1,2, Wei Tse Li1,2, Chengyu Chen1,2, Eric Y Chang3, Jessica Wang-Rodriguez4, Weg M Ongkeko1,2.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, overlaps with the ongoing epidemics of cigarette smoking and electronic cigarette (e-cig) vaping. However, there is scarce data relating COVID-19 risks and outcome with cigarette or e-cig use. In this study, we mined three independent RNA expression datasets from smokers and vapers to understand the potential relationship between vaping/smoking and the dysregulation of key genes and pathways related to COVID-19. We found that smoking, but not vaping, upregulates ACE2, the cellular receptor that SARS-CoV-2 requires for infection. Both smoking and use of nicotine and flavor-containing e-cigs led to upregulation of pro-inflammatory cytokines and inflammasome-related genes. Specifically, chemokines including CCL20 and CXCL8 are upregulated in smokers, and CCL5 and CCR1 are upregulated in flavor/nicotine-containing e-cig users. We also found genes implicated in inflammasomes, such as CXCL1, CXCL2, NOD2, and ASC, to be upregulated in smokers and these e-cig users. Vaping flavor and nicotine-less e-cigs, however, did not lead to significant cytokine dysregulation and inflammasome activation. Release of inflammasome products, such as IL-1B, and cytokine storms are hallmarks of COVID-19 infection, especially in severe cases. Therefore, our findings demonstrated that smoking or vaping may critically exacerbate COVID-19-related inflammation or increase susceptibility to COVID-19.Entities:
Keywords: ACE2; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; cytokines; electronic cigarettes; immune response; inflammation; tobacco; vaping
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32752138 PMCID: PMC7432384 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21155513
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1ACE2 and general immune dysregulation analysis in tobacco and electronic cigarette (e-cig) users. (A) Boxplots of ACE2 expression in current and former smokers, including those that have quit for less than and more than 15 years. (B) Boxplots of ACE2 expression in control and e-cigarette users, including patients who have never smoked tobacco and those who are former tobacco smokers. (C) Radar plots comparing immune cell infiltration across smokers, e-cigarette users vaping nicotine-less, flavor-less e-cigs, and vapers who used e-cigs containing nicotine and flavors. Greater immune cell infiltration is indicated by a value closer to zero and farther away from the center of the radar plot.
Figure 2Cytokine-related gene expression. Bar plots of the fold changed of significantly dysregulated cytokine genes in (A) current vs. former smokers; and control vs. e-cig users that have used e-cigs with (B) no flavors or nicotine or (C) with nicotine and/or flavors. Heat maps illustrating differences in cytokine gene expression between current smoker and former smokers that have either quit for (D) less than 15 years or (E) more than 15 years. Heat maps are split into quadrants based on current/former smokers and pro/anti-inflammatory cytokines. Red bar plots represent proinflammatory cytokines, and blue bar plots represent anti-inflammatory cytokines.
Significantly dysregulated cytokine-related genes.
| Gene | Geo2R | Kruskal-Wallis | Cohort | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| logFC | logFC | ||||
|
| 0.5055 | 0.1778 | 0.7851 | 0.0019 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.3871 | −0.1674 | 0.2907 | −0.0177 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0076 | 2.7834 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.6345 | 0.0701 | 0.5315 | 0.0007 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.5831 | −0.0391 | 0.7968 | −0.0010 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0353 | 0.3798 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.0491 | 0.1098 | 0.0650 | 0.0122 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.9108 | 0.0071 | 0.2106 | 0.0099 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0103 | 1.9380 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.5096 | 0.0407 | 0.4508 | 0.0093 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.0137 | 2.1347 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.1907 | −0.1347 | 0.1051 | 0.0074 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.0742 | −0.0526 | 0.0439 | −0.0021 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0481 | 0.1260 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.3466 | −0.0597 | 0.5055 | −0.0040 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.0426 | 0.3871 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.1372 | 0.1445 | 0.1197 | 0.0152 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.9680 | 0.0021 | 0.5639 | −0.0017 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0182 | −0.6035 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.9196 | −0.0084 | 0.7362 | 0.0029 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.3403 | 0.0438 | 0.4942 | 0.0004 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0017 | −1.1050 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.5137 | 0.1273 | 0.6649 | −0.0052 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.3701 | −0.1931 | 0.7968 | −0.0020 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0376 | 0.7497 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.1507 | 0.0736 | 0.4132 | −0.0010 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.5503 | 0.0511 | 0.8660 | 0.0016 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0353 | −0.3333 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.2557 | 0.0795 | 0.9361 | −0.0134 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.0231 | 0.2371 | 0.1800 | 0.0022 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0040 | −1.0251 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.2268 | 0.0852 | 0.2671 | 0.0032 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.0137 | −0.3959 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.5235 | 0.1650 | 0.1938 | −0.0106 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.9072 | 0.0040 | 0.6253 | 0.0003 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0453 | 0.4613 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.2259 | −0.1559 | 0.9361 | −0.0009 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.3154 | 0.0407 | 0.1289 | 0.0028 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0376 | 0.3800 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.9974 | −0.0002 | 0.4132 | 0.0010 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers |
| 0.4118 | −0.0497 | 0.3990 | −0.0016 | E-cig vs. None | |
| 0.0016 | 1.1718 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
Significantly dysregulated inflammasome-related gene expression.
| Gene | Geo2R | Kruskal-Wallis | Cohort | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| logFC | logFC | ||||
|
| 0.85415 | 0.024121 | 0.273192 | 0.009959 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.049094 | 0.463617 | 0.032858 | 0.0421 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers | |
| 0.897886 | 0.077011 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.622626 | 0.083064 | 0.241121 | 0.016747 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.274418 | 0.177215 | 0.395149 | 0.00718 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers | |
| 0.008846 | 1.553637 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.802924 | −0.03393 | 0.429555 | 0.004948 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.359789 | 0.122607 | 0.413227 | 0.003556 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers | |
| 0.008202 | 2.113189 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.995982 | 0.000195 | 0.918813 | 0.002349 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.183356 | 0.07004 | 0.056236 | 0.013534 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers | |
| 0.758085 | 0.158417 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.317884 | 0.034773 | 0.459914 | 0.001984 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.207633 | 0.099462 | 0.041595 | 0.014107 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers | |
| 0.777691 | 0.16816 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
|
| 0.659102 | −0.0204 | 0.721277 | −0.00158 | E-cig vs. None |
| 0.048781 | 0.187701 | 0.065034 | 0.017268 | E-cig vs. Former Smokers | |
| 0.100456 | 0.272032 | Current vs. Former Tobacco Smokers | |||
Figure 3Boxplots of significant correlations of e-cig or tobacco use with upregulation of inflammasome genes (Kruskal–Wallis, p < 0.05). A schematic linking the genes upregulated with their function within inflammasome pathways is shown.