Can your genes make you more prone to pneumococcal disease?

Host genetic variants associated with susceptibility and severity of pneumococcal pneumonia in adult patients

BACKGROUND

Pneumococcal community-acquired pneumonia (P-CAP) is a major cause of morbidity and hospitalization. Several host genetics factors influencing risk of pneumococcal disease have been identified, with less information about its association with P-CAP. The aim of the study was to assess the influence of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) within key genes involved in the innate immune response on the susceptibility to P-CAP and to study whether these polymorphic variants were associated with the severity and outcome of the episodes in a cohort of adult Caucasian patients.

METHODS

Seventeen SNPs from 7 genes (IL-R1, IL-4, IL-10, IL-12B, NFKBIA, NFKBIE, NFKBIZ) were analyzed. For susceptibility, a case-control study including a cohort of 57 adult with P-CAP, and 280 ethnically matched controls was performed. Genetic influence on clinical severity and outcome was evaluated in a prospective observational study including all consecutive adult P-CAP patients from November 2015 to May 2017.

RESULTS

The NFKBIA polymorphism rs696 and a haplotype combination were associated with susceptibility to P-CAP (OR = 0.62, p = 0.005 and OR = 0.63, p = 0.008, respectively). The SNP IL4 rs2227284 was associated with severe P-CAP (OR = 2.17, p = 0.04). IL-R1 (rs3917267) and IL-10 (rs3024509) variants were related with respiratory failure (OR = 3.31, p = 0.001 and OR = 0.18, p = 0.003, respectively) as well as several haplotype combinations in NFKBIA, NFKBIZ, IL-R1 and IL-10 (p = 0,02, p = 0,01, p = 0,001, p = 0,03, respectively). CURB-65 values were associated with the IL-10 rs3024509 variant (beta = - 0.4, p = 0.04), and with haplotype combinations of NFKBIZ and IL-10 (p = 0.05, p = 0.04, respectively). Genetic variants in IL-10 (rs3024509) and in IL-12B (rs730691) were associated with PSI values (beta = - 0.54, p = 0.01, and beta = - 0.28, p = 0.04, respectively), as were allelic combinations in IL-R1 (p = 0.02) and IL-10 (p = 0.01). Finally, several polymorphisms in the IL-R1 gene (rs13020778, rs2160227, & rs3917267) were associated with the time elapsed until clinical stability (beta = - 0.83, p = 0.03; beta = - 1, p = 0.02 and beta = 1.07, p = 0.008, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

A genetic variant in NFKBIA was associated with susceptibility to P-CAP in adult Caucasian patients and genetic variants from key cytokines of the innate immune response (Il-4, IL-10, IL-R1 and IL-12B) and NF-κB inhibitors were associated with different phenotypes of severe P-CAP. If validated, these SNPs may help to identify people at risk of P-CAP or severe P-CAP on which preventive measures could be applied.

Behavioral Genetics in Criminal and Civil Courts

Although emerging findings in psychiatric and behavioral genetics create hope for improved prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders, the introduction of such data as evidence in criminal and civil proceedings raises a host of ethical, legal, and social issues. Should behavioral and psychiatric genetic data be admissible in judicial proceedings? If so, what are the various means for obtaining such evidence, and for what purposes should its admission be sought and permitted? How could-and should-such evidence affect judicial outcomes in criminal and civil proceedings? And what are the potential implications of using behavioral and psychiatric genetic evidence for individuals and communities, and for societal values of equality and justice? This article provides an overview of the historical and current developments in behavioral genetics. We then explore the extent to which behavioral genetic evidence has-and should-affect determinations of criminal responsibility and sentencing, as well as the possible ramifications of introducing such evidence in civil courts, with a focus on tort litigation and child custody disputes. We also consider two ways in which behavioral genetic evidence may come to court in the future-through genetic theft or the subpoena of a litigant's biospecimen data that was previously obtained for clinical or research purposes-and the concerns that these possibilities raise. Finally, we highlight the need for caution and for approaches to prevent the misuse of behavioral genetic evidence in courts.