Common, low-frequency, rare, and ultra-rare coding variants contribute to COVID-19 severity =========================================================================================== * Chiara Fallerini * Nicola Picchiotti * Margherita Baldassarri * Kristina Zguro * Sergio Daga * Francesca Fava * Elisa Benetti * Sara Amitrano * Mirella Bruttini * Maria Palmieri * Susanna Croci * Mirjam Lista * Giada Beligni * Floriana Valentino * Ilaria Meloni * Marco Tanfoni * Francesca Colombo * Enrico Cabri * Maddalena Fratelli * Chiara Gabbi * Stefania Mantovani * Elisa Frullanti * Marco Gori * Francis P. Crawley * Guillaume Butler-Laporte * Brent Richards * Hugo Zeberg * Miklos Lipcsey * Michael Hultstrom * Kerstin U. Ludwig * Eva C. Schulte * Erola Pairo-Castineira * John Kenneth Baillie * Axel Schmidt * Robert Frithiof * WES/WGS working group within the HGI * GenOMICC Consortium * GEN-COVID Multicenter Study * Francesca Mari * Alessandra Renieri * Simone Furini ## Abstract The combined impact of common and rare exonic variants in COVID-19 host genetics is currently insufficiently understood. Here, common and rare variants from whole exome sequencing data of about 4,000 SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals were used to define an interpretable machine learning model for predicting COVID-19 severity. Firstly, variants were converted into separate sets of Boolean features, depending on the absence or the presence of variants in each gene. An ensemble of LASSO logistic regression models was used to identify the most informative Boolean features with respect to the genetic bases of severity. The Boolean features selected by these logistic models were combined into an Integrated PolyGenic Score that offers a synthetic and interpretable index for describing the contribution of host genetics in COVID-19 severity, as demonstrated through testing in several independent cohorts. Selected features belong to ultra-rare, rare, low-frequency, and common variants, including those in linkage disequilibrium with known GWAS loci. Noteworthly, around one quarter of the selected genes are sex-specific. Pathway analysis of the selected genes associated with COVID-19 severity reflected the multi-organ nature of the disease. The proposed model might provide useful information for developing diagnostics and therapeutics, while also being able to guide bedside disease management. Keywords * COVID-19 * Host genetics * Integrative polygenic score * Genetic science modelling * pathway enrichment analysis ## Introduction For almost two years COVID-19 has demonstrated itself to be a disease having a broad spectrum of clinical presentations: from asymptomatic patients to those with severe symptoms leading to death or persistent disease (“long COVID”) [1–3]. While developing vaccination programmes and other preventive measures to significantly dampen infection transmission and reduce disease expression, a much deeper and more precise understanding of the interplay between SARS-CoV-2 and host genetics is required to support the development of treatments for new virus variants as they arise. Furthermore, advances in modelling the interplay between SARS-CoV-2 and host genetics hold significant promise for addressing other complex diseases. In this study, we demonstrate the value of genetic modelling with its direct translatability into drug development and clinical care in the context of a severe public health crisis. The identification of host genetic factors modifying disease susceptibility and/or disease severity has the potential to reveal the biological basis of disease susceptibility and outcome as well as to subsequently contribute to treatment amelioration [4]. From a scientific point of view, COVID-19 represents a particularly interesting and accessible complex disorder for modeling host genetic data because the environmental factor (SARS-CoV-2) can be readily identified by a PCR-based swab test. The still moderate viral genome variability has thus far been shown to have relatively low impact on disease severity [5] where currently age, sex, and comorbidities are the major factors predicting disease susceptibility and outcome [6]. While these factors certainly have significant value for prediction, they provide limited insights into disease pathophysiology and are of limited relevance for drug development. Common variants in the human genome affecting the susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 severity have been successfully identified by Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWASs) [7–9]. However, these variants only explain a small fraction of trait variability and, as it is well documented, GWASs are difficult to interpret because they often associate non-coding variants with phenotype; therefore the relevant genes need to be pinpointed by deeper follow-up analyses. In contrast, next-generation sequencing based studies have identified variants in a few genes related to innate immunity which can solely underlie rare severe forms of COVID-19 [10–13]. In these rare affected families, the predictivity is high as the susceptibility for severe COVID-19 follows Mendelian inheritance patterns. However, these patients represent only a small proportion of those severely affected by COVID-19. Taken together, genetic findings can currently only explain a limited proportion of COVID-19 susceptibility and severity, in spite of the relatively high predicted heritability of COVID-19 and COVID-19 symptoms [14]. A better and more holistic understanding of host genetics could support the development of more specific, or even targeted drugs and treatment interventions leading to less morbidity and mortality. The Italian GEN-COVID Multicenter Study collected more than two thousand biospecimens and clinical data from SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals [15], and whole exome sequencing (WES) analysis contributed to the identification of rare variants [7] and common polymorphisms [16–18] associated with COVID-19 severity. In 2020, we started to investigate how common variants may combine with rare variants to determine COVID-19 severity in WES data using a first small cohort of hospitalized patients. This pilot analysis revealed that the combination of rare and common variants could potentially impact clinical outcome [19]. We then proposed a new *post-Mendelian model* for a genetic characterization of the disorder [20] based on an adapted Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) [21], called *Integrated PolyGenic Score* (IPGS). This allowed us to reach a more precise disease severity prediction than that based on sex and age alone. In this article, we substantially improve this *post-Mendalian model* to include ultra-rare and low-frequency variants while also demonstrating that IPGS significantly contributes to predictivity in combination with - as well as alongside - age and sex, and is able to extract patient-specific genes. The IPGS predictivity was also sustained in three independent European cohorts of the WES/Whole-Genome Sequencing study working group within the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative [22]. ## Material and Methods ### Contributing cohorts Five different cohorts (from Germany, Italy, Quebec, Sweden, UK) contributed to this study as described in **Supplementary Table 1**. For multi ancestry cohorts (Quebec and UK) the subpopulation of European Ancestry was included in the study. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for each study (**Supplementary Table 1**). ### Phenotype definitions The training of the model proposed for predicting the severity of COVID-19 requires as inputs the exome variants, age, sex, and COVID-19 severity assessed using a modified version of the WHO COVID-19 Outcome Scale [23] as coded into the following six classifications: 1. death; 2. hospitalized receiving invasive mechanical ventilation; 3. hospitalized, receiving continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) ventilation; 4. hospitalized, receiving low-flow supplemental oxygen; 5. hospitalized, not receiving supplemental oxygen; and 6. not hospitalized. The aim of the model is to predict a binary classification of patients into mild and severe cases, where a patient is considered severe if hospitalized and receiving any form of respiratory support (WHO severity-grading equal to 4 or higher in 8 points classification). The next section describes how the annotation of exome variants and the selection of patients were performed in the GEN-COVID cohort. Following this the training and testing of the model are described. ### Massive parallel sequencing #### GEN-COVID cohort Whole Exome Sequencing with at least 97% coverage at 20x was performed using the Illumina NovaSeq6000 System (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). Library preparation was performed using the Illumina Exome Panel (Illumina) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Library enrichment was tested by qPCR, and the size distribution and concentration were determined using Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). The Novaseq6000 System (Illumina) was used for DNA sequencing through 150 bp paired-end reads. Variant calling was performed according to the GATK4[24] best practice guidelines, using BWA [25] for mapping and ANNOVAR [26] for annotating. #### Swedish cohort Whole Exome Sequencing was performed using the Twist Bioscience exome capture probe and was sequenced on the Illumina NovaSeq6000 platform. Data were then analyzed using the McGill Genome Center bioinformatics pipeline ([https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz037](https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz037)) in accordance with GATK best practices. #### DeCOI Germany 800-1000 ng of genomic DNA of each individual was fragmented to an average length of 350 bp. Library preparation was performed using the TruSeq DNA PCR-free kit (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Whole genome sequences were obtained as 150 bp paired-end reads on S4 flow cells using the NovaSeq6000 system (Illumina). The intended average sequencing depth was 30X. The DRAGEN pipeline (Illumina, version 3.6.3 or 3.5.7) was used for alignment and joint variant calling was performed with the Glnexus software (version 1.3.2). Individuals with a 20-fold coverage in less than 96% of the protein coding sequence were removed as well as related individuals to retain only from related pairs. Variant QC was performed using hail (version 0.2.58). European individuals were selected by performing PCA analysis along with the 1000 genomes data. Finally, annotation was performed using Variant Effect Predictor (VEP, version 101). #### BQC-19 Whole genome sequencing at mean coverage of 30x was performed on the Illumina NovaSeq6000 platform, then analyzed using the McGill Genome Center bioinformatics pipeline ([https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz037](https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz037)), in accordance with GATK best practice guidelines. #### GenOMICC/ISARIC4C Whole genome sequencing at mean coverage of 20x was performed on the Illumina NovaSeq6000 platform and then analysed using the Dragen pipeline (software v01.011.269.3.2.22, hardware v01.011.269) . Variants were genotyped with the GATK GenotypeGVCFs tool v4.1.8.1. ### PC analysis The standard analysis of Principal Components was performed and the first principal components turned out to be connected with the patient’s ethnicity collected in the medical records. Therefore, the genetic ancestry of the patients was estimated using a random forest classifier trained on samples from the 1000 genomes project and using as input features the first 20 principal components computed from the common variants by PLINK [27]. In order to avoid bias in the analysis due to the different ethnicity, only patients of genetic European ancestry were retained for further analyses. ### Definition of the Boolean features Variants were converted into 12 sets of Boolean features to better represent the variability at the gene-level. Firstly, any variant not impacting on the protein sequence was discarded. Then the remaining variants were classified according to their minor allele frequency (MAF) as reported in gnomAD for the reference population as: ultra-rare, MAF<0.1%; rare, 0.1%<=MAF<1%; low-frequency, 1%<=MAF<5%; and common, MAF>=5%. Non-Finnish European (NFE) was used as a reference population. SNPs with MAF not available in gnomAD were treated as ultra-rare. INDELs with frequency not available in gnomAD were treated as ultra-rare when present only once in the cohort and otherwise discarded as possible artefacts of sequencing. For the ultra-rare variants, 3 alternative Boolean representations were defined, which are designed to capture the autosomal dominant (AD), autosomal recessive (AR), and X-linked (XL) model of inheritance, respectively. The AD and AR representations included a feature for all the genes on autosomes. These features were equal to 1 when the corresponding gene presented at least 1 for the AD model, or 2 for the AR model, and variants in the ultra-rare frequency range and 0 otherwise. The XL representation included only genes belonging to the X chromosome. These features were equal to 1 when the corresponding gene presented at least 1 variant in the ultra-rare frequency range and 0 otherwise. The same approach was used to define AD, AR, and XL Boolean features for the rare and low-frequency variants. Common variants were represented using a different approach that is designed to better capture the presence of alternative haplotypes. For each gene, all the possible combinations of common variants were computed. For instance, in the case of a gene belonging to an autosome with 2 common variants (named A and B), 3 combinations are possible (A, B, and AB), and (consequently) 3 Boolean features were defined both for the AD and AR model. In the AR model each of these 3 features was equal to 1 if all the variants in that particular combination were present in the homozygous state and 0 otherwise. The same rule was used for the AD model, but setting the feature to 1 even if the variants in that particular combination are in the heterozygous state. In both models, AD and AR, a further feature was defined for each gene to represent the absence of any of the previously defined combinations. In the AD model this feature was equal to 1 if no common variant is present and 0 otherwise; in the AR model, it is equal to 1 if no common variant is present in the homozygous state and 0 otherwise. The same approach was used to define the set of Boolean features for common variants in genes belonging to the X chromosome. The full list of Boolean representations is reported in **Supplementary Table 2**. ### Model Training The dataset was divided into a training set and a testing set (90/10), and the entire procedure described in this section was performed using only samples in the training set. A bootstrap approach with 100 iterations was adopted to train the model. At each bootstrap iteration, 90% of the samples were selected (without replication), and the following two steps were performed: (step 1) selection of the most relevant features for each Boolean representations; and (step 2) definition of the weights of the *Integrated Polygenic Score* (*IPGS*). After the 100 bootstrap iterations, the information extracted on relevant features and weighting factors are merged to define the final *IPGS* (step 3). The *IPGS* is then used, together with age and sex, for training a model that predicts the COVID-19 severity (step 4). These 4 steps of the training procedure are described in detail in the next subsections. Because the model is based on a combination of rare and common variants, the training procedure should be performed using a dataset with homogeneous ancestry. #### Step 1: Features’ Selection The subsets of the most relevant features were identified using logistic regression models with Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regularization. Separate logistic models were trained for each of the 12 sets of Boolean features. The predicted outcome variable for each of these models was a re-classified phenotype adjusted by age and sex. In order to compute these re-classified phenotypes as adjusted by age and sex, the patients were first divided into males and females. Then for each sex an ordinal logistic regression model was fitted by using the age to predict the WHO phenotype classification into 6 grades. The ordinal logistic regression model was chosen as: it imposes a simple monotone relation between input feature and target variable; and it provides easily interpretable thresholds between the predicted classes. The patients with a predicted grading equal to the actual grading were excluded. The remaining patients were divided into two classes depending on whether their actual phenotype was milder or more severe than the one expected for a patient of that age and sex. This procedure has the benefit of isolating patients whose genetic factors are most important for predicting COVID-19 severity. This binary trait, i.e. phenotype more/less severe than expected, was used as the outcome variable for the 12 LASSO logistic models based on the 12 separate Boolean representations. For each LASSO model, the regularization strength was optimized by 10-folds cross-validation with 50 equally spaced values in the logarithmic scale in the range [10−2, 101]. The optimal regularization strength was selected as the one with the best trade-off between the simplicity of the model and the cross-validation score, i.e. as the highest regularization strength providing an average score closer to the highest average score than 0.5 standard deviations. Once the regularization strength was defined, the LASSO model was re-trained using all the samples in that particular bootstrap iteration. The features with non-null coefficients are the ones selected for the next step. In summary, for each bootstrap iteration, this procedure returns 12 lists of features (one for each Boolean representation) that are expected to be the most important features for predicting the phenotype adjusted by age and sex (in that particular bootstrap iteration). #### Step 2: Weights of the Integrated Polygenic Score (IPGS) In the previous step, the Boolean representations are considered isolated from each other. The aim of the *IPGS* is to combine information from different representations (**Equation 1**). In order to reach this goal, it is necessary to compute the relative weights of the different contributions. For each bootstrap iteration, the list of relevant features extracted as described in the previous section are used to compute the number of features that are associated with mildness or severity for the different frequency ranges. For instance, ![Graphic][1] corresponds to the number of features associated with the mild phenotype coming from Boolean features computed for variants in the frequency range [0.1%, 1%]. A feature is considered associated with the mild phenotype when its coefficient in the LASSO model estimated in step 1 is negative, i.e. it contributes to the prediction of the phenotype adjusted by age and sex in the direction of a phenotype less severe than what expected at that particular age and sex. The same rule, applied to the corresponding Boolean representation, is used to define the other feature-counts appearing in **Equation 1**. The weighting factors in Equation 1 were estimated as the ones that maximize the Silhouette coefficient of the separation between the clusters of patients more/less severe than expected. The minimization was performed with weighting factors restricted to the following ranges: *FLF* ∈ [1, 4], *FR* ∈ [2, 8] and *FUR* ∈ [5, 100]. This procedure returns 3 optimal values for the weighing factors associated with each bootstrap iteration. #### Step 3: *IPGS* definition In this step, the data extracted at each bootstrap iteration in steps 1 and 2 are combined to define the *IPGS*. Firstly, for each of the Boolean features, of all the 12 representations, the number of times this feature was selected in the 100 bootstrap iterations is computed. Then, the entire bootstrap procedure is repeated using random input phenotypes, and the 5th percentile of the number of times that a feature is associated with a random phenotype is estimated. This threshold, computed separately for each Boolean representation, was used to select which Boolean features are included in the final model. As no significant association is expected among the Boolean features and the random phenotype, the threshold of the 5th percentile is expected to exclude with a 95% level of confidence the possible false positive associations. For the GEN-COVID cohort, 7249 features were selected by this procedure, which correspond to ∼4.4% of the initial number of Boolean features. The weighing factors in Equation 1 were computed as the median values of the estimates obtained in the 100 bootstrap iterations. #### Step 4: Training of the predictive model based on age, sex, and *IPGS* The procedure described in the previous sections completely defines how to calculate the *IPGS*. The predictive model of the binary COVID-19 severity (hospitalized patients with any form of respiratory support versus all other patients) was defined as a logistic model that uses as input features IPGS, age, and sex. It should be noted that in steps 1-3, only patients that deviates from their expected severity based on age and sex were used. The procedure was designed to isolate the genetic basis of COVID-19 severity. Instead, in this final step, *IPGS*, age and sex are combined to predict the actual COVID-19 severity, i.e. hospitalized patients with any form of respiratory support. In order to prevent overfitting, the model was fitted using 466 samples different from the training set adopted in steps 1-3. During the fitting procedure, the class unbalancing is tackled by penalizing the misclassification of the minority class with a multiplicative factor inversely proportional to the class frequencies. The percentile normalization of the *IPGS* scores is performed within each cohort. An alternative logistic model that used as input features only age and sex was also fitted on the same training set. The comparison between the two models is intended to evaluate if the genetic information summarized in the *IPGS* improves the prediction of severity compared to a model based on age and sex alone. A further logistic regression model is fitted by only considering the *IPGS* variable. ### Model Testing The training procedure returned 2 logistic models to be compared: one using as input features only age and sex, and the other one using as input features age, sex, and the *IPGS*. These models were tested, without any further adjustment, using other cohorts of European ancestry. The performances of the two models, with and without *IPGS*, were evaluated and compared in terms of accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and specificity. The increases of the performances are evaluated with respect to the performances of a model where the values of the *IPGS* feature have been shuffled, by computing the p-value on the empirical null distribution. In addition, the empirical probability density function of *IPGS* has been estimated for the severe and non-severe patients of the cohort including both train and test sets and a t-test is carried out to evaluate whether the means of the two distributions were significantly different. As a further evaluation of the importance of the *IPGS* score on the severity prediction, univariate logistic regression models using as independent variables age (continuous represented in decades), sex, and *IPGS* were fitted to the dataset that combines both the training set and the testing sets for a total of 2,240 patients. These models were used to estimate the odds ratios and the p-values of the association with the severe phenotype. Furthermore, a multivariable logistic regression was fitted using IPGS, age, and sex together. Finally, a multivariable logistic regression was performed using as predictor variables: IPGS, age, sex and comoribidities (congestive/ischemic heart failure; asthma/COPD/OSAS; diabetes; hypertension; cancer). This latter model has been fitted in the training set, where the information on comorbidities was available. ### Pathway analysis Pathway analysis was made using a ranked GSEA approach [28–29], modified according to the specificity of our data. The metrics for gene ranking was calculated on the basis of the results of feature selection models, weighting in each Boolean feature both beta values and the number of bootstrap iterations where it was found significantly associated with severity/mildness (**Supplementary Tables 3-6**). All the Boolean features that were found significant in at least one of the models were included in the list. As the sign of beta depends on which allele is taken as reference (which is relative for common variants), we decided to use absolute beta values for all the features. To also weight the importance according to variant frequency, we used the F values from the *IPGS* score for the four categories (Ultra-rare 5, Rare 4, Low Frequency 2, Common 1). Finally, we summed all the weights of each Boolean feature by gene. Briefly: WgeneA = ∑FeaturesGeneA ABS(meanβ)∗count∗F Pathway enrichment analysis was made using the GSEA-preranked module (v. 7.2.4) of the Genepattern platform [26], on several pathway categories (BIOCARTA, KEGG, REACTOME, GOBP, HALLMARKS, C7 and C8), limiting the size of genesets to the 10-300 range and performing 10,000 permutations. The networks showing similarity of significant pathways were built using the EnrichmentMap algorithm [30] in the Cytoscape suite (v. 3.8.2) [31–32]. Parameters used for network creations are: Jaccard Overlap Combined Index (k constant = 0.5), edge cutoff 0.05. ### Website and data distribution The coordination of international partners has been possible through the Host Genetics Initiative (HGI) ([https://www.covid19hg.org/projects/](https://www.covid19hg.org/projects/)). Results can be shared through the Gen-Covid website ([https://sites.google.com/dbm.unisi.it/gen-covid](https://sites.google.com/dbm.unisi.it/gen-covid)). ## Code availability Data analyses were performed using Python with the Scipy ecosystem [33], and the scikit-learn library [34]. Statistical association was done with the statsmodel Python library. The code is freely available at the github repository: [https://github.com/gen-covid/pmm](https://github.com/gen-covid/pmm). ## Results ### The post-Mendelian paradigm for COVID-19 modelization for combining interpretability with predictivity based on ultra-rare, rare, low-frequency, and common variants The aim of the present study was to develop an easily interpretable model that could be used to predict the severity of COVID-19 from host genetic data. Patients were considered severe when hospitalized and receiving any form of respiratory support. The focus on this target variable is motivated by the practical importance of rapidly identifying which patients are more likely to require oxygen support, in an effort to prevent further complications. Interpretability has been a guiding principle in the definition of the machine learning model, as only a readily interpretable model can provide useful and reliable information for clinical practice while also contributing significantly to diagnostic, and therapeutic targeting. The high dimensionality of host genetic data poses a serious challenge to evident and reliable interpretability. So far, the development of a robust predictive model able to make a direct association between single variants and disease severity grading based on an accurate analysis of the vast number of host genetic variants compared to a much smaller number of individual patients has proven to be too complex and ultimately unreliable. In order to address the complexity with predictive reliability, an enriched gene-level representation of host genetic data was modeled in a machine learning framework. The complexity of COVID-19 immediately suggests that both common and rare variants are expected to contribute to the likelihood of developing a severe form of the disease. However, the contribution of common and rare variants to the severe phenotype is not expected to be the same. A single rare variant that impairs the protein function might cause a severe phenotype by itself after viral infection, while this is not so probable for a common polymorphism, which is likely to have a less marked effect on protein functionality. These observations led to the definition of a score, named *IPGS*, that includes data regarding the variants at different frequencies: ![Formula][2] In **Equation 1**, *n* variables are used to indicate the number of input features of the predictive model that promote the severe outcome (superscript *s*) or that protect from a severe outcome (superscript *m*) and with genetic variants having Minor Allele Frequency (MAF)>=5% (common, subscript *C*), 1% =contributing to COVID-19 severity; ![Graphic][4] = contributing to COVID-19 mildness. Pink faces= contributing to females only; Blue faces = contributing to males only; Pink/Blue faces = contribution in both sexes. In parentheses: AD=autosomal dominant inheritance; AR=autosomal recessive inheritance; XL=X-linked recessive inheritance. **A)** ultra-rare mutations in the RNA sensor *TLR7*, *TLR3*, and *TICAM1* (encoding TRIF protein), already reported associated with XL, AR and AD inheritance [10–13] impair interferon (IFNs) production in innate immune system cells. Mutations in *TLR8*, as well as of the signal transducer *IRAK1* also impair interferon production. The specific location of *TLR7/8* and *IRAK1* (on the X chromosome) as well as X-inactivation escaping are responsible for opposite effects in males and females. Mutation in *RNASEL* impair the antiviral effect of the gene. In lung epithelial cells, *ACE2* ultra-rare variants (on the X chromosome) exert protective effects (probably) due to lowering virus entrance, while ultra-rare variants in *ADAM17* (might) reduce the shedding of *ACE2* and induce a severe outcome. The same is true for *CFTR* and *SCNN1A* (encoding ENaCA protein and involved in a CFTR-related physiological pathway), and the lipid transporter *ABCA3*[44]. Mutations of *ADAMTS13* in vessels reduce the cleavage of the multimeric von Willebrand Factor (VWF), leading to thrombosis; **B)** Rare variants of the estrogen regulated *TLR5* are associated with severity in females. Rare variants of the CFTR-related *SLC26A9* are associated with severity in both sexes. This ion transporter has three discrete physiological modes: nCl(-)-HCO(3)(-) exchanger, Cl(-) channel, and Na(+)-anion cotransporter. Other examples of rare mutations associated with severity are the NK and T cell receptor *FCRL6*, IFN signal transducer *IRAK2*, and the actin depolymerization *MICAL2*; **C)** low-frequency variants in another CFTR-related gene, *SCNN1D* (encoding for ENaCD protein) are associated with mildness, while rare variants in the following genes are associated with severity: cargo protein SPMA6, vesicle formation PEX1, inflammatory protein *NOD2* (*CARD15*); **D)** A number of coding polymorphisms, indicated with an asterisk, are in LD with genomic SNPs already associated with COVID-19 (The complete list is presented in **Supplementary Table 11**) [8, 37]. In some cases, such as the case of *SFTDP*, the genomic SNP is the coding polymorphism itself. Of note are the genes of surfactant proteins associated with severe disease: *SFTDP* gene encoding for SP-D protein and *SFTPA1* gene encoding for SP-A protein; the signal transducer, *PPP1R15A* gene encoding for GADD34 protein. OAS1 and OAS3 related to RNA clearance of *RNASEL* (reported in panel A as having ultra-rare mutations; included here should also be the already reported *TLR3412* [17]; the already reported SELP603 related to thrombosis [18]. Note: *OAS1* haplotype A= c.1039-1G>A, (p.(Gly162Ser)), (p.(Ala352Thr)), (p.(Arg361Thr)), (p.(Gly397Arg)), (p.(Thr358Profs*26)). *OAS1* haplotype B = haplotype without the variant combination in haplotype A. Among the extracted ultra-rare variants there was a group of genes, such as *TLR3*, *TLR7* and *TICAM1*, already shown to be directly involved in the Mendelian-like forms of COVID-19 (Fig. 2A and **Supplementary Table 3a-b**). Furthermore, another group of genes are natural candidates because of their function: these include the *ACE2* shedding protein *ADAM17*, *CFTR*-related genes, genes involved in glycolipid metabolism, genes expressed by cells of the innate immune system, and genes involved in the coagulation pathway. Finally, a group of genes led by *ACE2* (if affected by ultra-rare variants) confers protection from the severe disease. This group includes several genes whose mutations are responsible for auto-inflammatory disorders. Among the rare variants extracted, we identified some genes as candidates for COVID-19 severity, including *TLR5* and *SLC26A9* as well as other genes involved in the inflammatory response Fig. 2B and **Supplemnetary Table 4a-b**). Among the low-frequency variants extracted, we identified some genes associated with either severity or protection from severe COVID-19 that are linked to the *CFTR* pathway (e.g., *PSMA6*) as well as specific genes involved in the immune response (e.g., *NOD2*) (Fig. 2C and **Supplementary Table 5a-b**). The model was also able to identify a group of extracted common variants already shown to be linked to either severe or mild COVID-19 (Fig. 2D and **Supplementary Table 6a-b**). Among them are the L412F *TLR3* and D603N *SELP* polymorphisms, already reported to be associated with the severe disease [17–18] and several coding polymorphisms in Linkage Disequilibrium (LD) with already reported genomic SNP, such as the ABO blood group, *OAS1*-*3* genes, *PPP1R15A* gene and others [4]. In conclusion, considering their functions, genes involved in the immune and inflammatory responses, or those involved in the coagulation pathway and NK and T cell receptor, are to be considered natural candidates for severe or mild COVID-19. ### Integrated PolyGenic Score definition The Boolean features selected by the LASSO logistic models were used to calculate the *n* variables in **Equation 1** (Fig. 3A-B). The corresponding weights (*F* variables) were defined by optimizing the separation between severe and mild cases as offered by the *IPGS* formula. The optimization was measured using the Silhouette coefficient, and the optimal values were computed using a grid-search approach over a predefined grid (*FLF* ∈ [1, 4], *FR* ∈ [2, 8], and *FUR* ∈ [5, 100]). This optimization returned values of **2, 4,** and **5** for the low-frequency, rare, and ultra-rare variants, respectively (Fig. 3C-D). ![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F3.medium.gif) [Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F3) Figure 3. Integrated PolyGenic Score Definition **A)** The model is based on the comparison of Boolean features of severity versus Boolean features of mildness. **B)** Graphic representation of the *IPGS* formula used for this model. **C)** Principle for the calibration of different weighting factors based on the separation of severe and mild cases. **D)** The obtained value for low-frequency, rare, and ultra-rare, being F=1 for common variants. Common variants are indicated as common haplotypes since they are intended as combinations of coding variants within a single gene (see Fig. 1C and the **Material and Methods** section). ### Pathway analysis In order to understand the biological mechanisms underlying the variability of disease, we performed a pathways analysis of the genes carrying variants discovered in the feature selection described above. The features obtained with this approach do not have the same predicted impact and are not discovered with the same confidence. Therefore, we decided to perform a rank-based pathway analysis, with genes with the highest impact and confidence ranking highest in the list, rather than a simple over-representation approach. We ranked all the genes that were found to be significantly associated with severity/mildness in at least one bootstrap repetition, based on a score that takes into account three parameters: average coefficient in the LASSO models selecting the feature, number of significant bootstrap results, and the *F* correction factor for the frequency category used in the *IPGS* (detailed in the Methods section below). For genes with more than one significant Boolean feature, we summed up the scores of each feature. Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) was then performed using two separate ranked gene lists (**Supplementary Table 7)** for females and males, followed by the generation of similarity networks using EnrichmentMap (Fig. 4A). The usage of rank-based search method allows to identify statistically significant pathways starting from extensive list genes, as each gene is associated with its specific importance. Although no pathways satisfied the 0.25% FDR threshold normally required for standard GSEA analyses, the set of pathways considered significant using more relaxed thresholds on p values were shown to group in meaningful modules, providing useful information on pathogenetic mechanisms and on the genes that could explain how they can be affected. The network of all the pathways significantly enriched in both females and males ranked gene lists (p<0.01, n=25) is depicted in Fig. 4B, while the network of all the pathways enriched in either females or males with a more stringent p-value (p<0.005, n=100) is shown in Fig. 4C. Detailed information on the names of the pathways and p-values of enrichment is reported in **Supplementary Figures 1 and 3**. For the most representative pathways of each network, the heatmaps of the genes with their weights of association to disease variability are shown in Fig. 4D and **Supplementary Figures 2 and 4**, while gene lists and gene weights for all the significant pathways are reported in **Supplementary Table 8.** ![Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F4.medium.gif) [Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F4) Figure 4. Pathway enrichment analysis of the genes associated with disease severity/mildness. **A)** Workflow of the analysis. Genes corresponding to Boolean features found to be associated at least once were ranked based on a composite score and subjected to Gene Set Enrichment Analysis. Two separate ranked gene lists for females (7,317 genes, weight range 3×10-5-561) and males (7,325 genes, weight range 7×10-5-452) were used. The list of significant pathways was analysed and presented as a similarity network: **B)** Similarity network of the pathways with a significant enrichment both in females and males (p<0.01). The size of the circles is proportional to the pahway size. Significance above threshold is indicated by the red color. **C)** Similarity network of the pathways with a significant enrichment either in females (red left half of the circles) or males (red right half of the circles) (p<0.005). **D)** Heatmaps of the genes belonging to a selection of pathways of interest. The color gradient represents the weight of each gene, calculated and described in methods. Please note high ranking of TLR genes (*TLR5*, *TLR8*, *TLR3* and *TLR7*) in the pathway of Response to Mechanical Stimulus, *CFTR* gene in Recognition for Clathrin-mediated endocytosis, *RNASEL*, *TYK2*, *OAS1* and *OAS3* genes in Interferon alpha-beta signaling. Note also the presence of the relevant pathway of Exhaust vs Memory CD8 T cell Up that also includes *TLR7* gene. ### COVID-19 post-Mendelian model predictivity The functional interpretation of the variants identified by the feature selection approach, complemented by the strong link between the involved human biological pathways and COVID-19 pathogenicity, support the hypothesis that the *IPGS* equation developed here may contribute significantly to predicting the severity of COVID-19. This hypothesis was tested by using a logistic regression model that predicts COVID-19 severity based on age, sex and the the *IPGS* (after percentile normalization). The training set is composed of 466 patients not included in the training set previously exploited for the *IPGS* feature engineering. The model’s performance was then tested using three independent cohort sets of European ancestry (Fig. 5A). The model exhibited an overall accuracy of 0.73, precision equal to 0.78, with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.72 and 0.75, respectively. Noteworthy, all the aforementioned metrics are higher than the corresponding values obtained using a logistic model that adopted as input features only age and sex. The increase in performances of the model with *IPGS* suggests that this score indeed confers significant additional (genetic) information for predicting COVID-19 severity compared to only age and sex. The increase of the performances is statistically significant (p-value < 0.05 for accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity) with respect to the distribution of performances for an ensemble of models where the *IPGS* feature has been randomized (Fig. 5C **lower left**). A third logistic regression model fitted with *IPGS* alone, shows performances well above the random guess. Furthermore, the empirical probability density function of *IPGS* scores (Fig. 5C **right**) has been estimated for the severe and non-severe patients of the cohort including both training and testing sets. It is worth noting the shift on the right of the *IPGS* distribution for the severe patients, with significant p-value (<0.001) for the t-test of mean difference. This difference between severe and non-severe cases is preserved for the male and female cohorts when analyzed separately (p-values <0.001 and 0.024, respectively). ![Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F5.medium.gif) [Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F5) Figure 5. Model predictivity **A)** The post-Mendelian model was trained using a sample of 466 patients from the GEN-COVID cohort n.2 and Swedish cohort (having cases only) and tested with three additional European cohorts from UK, Germany and Canada. **B)** A logistic regression model was used for severity prediction. Severity was defined mainly on the basis of hospitalisation versus not hospitalisation. Hospitalised cases without respiratory support were included in controls. TN=True Negative; TP=True Positive; FN=False Negative; FP=False Positive. **C)** When the IPGS is added to age and gender as a regressor, the performances of the model increase: accuracy +1%, precision +1%, sensitivity +2%, specificity +1%. These increases are statistically significant (p-value <0.05 for accuracy, precision, sensitivity and specificity) with respect to the null distribution obtained by randomizing the *IPGS*. The performances of the model built with IPGS alone are all above the random guess. In addition, on the right we reported the distributions of the *IPGS* for severe and non-severe patients. **D)** In the three tested cohorts, when the *IPGS* is added to age and sex as a regressor, all the performances increase: the accuracy up to +2%, the precision up to +1%, the sensitivity up to +3%, and the specificity up to +2%. We conclude that *IPGS* is able to improve prediction of clinical outcome in addition to the well-established powerful factors of age and sex. **E)** The univariate logistic regression models fitted on the cohort including both train and test, confirmed that the *IPGS* is associated with severity with an odds-ratio (OR) of 2.32, while age (continuous in decades) and sex have an OR of 1.89 and 2.99, respectively. In line with the results obtained using the overall test set, the model including *IPGS*, age, and sex performed better than the model considering only sex and age as inputs, in each of the testing cohorts, separately (Fig. 5D). The increase in performance was systematically observed throughout all the cohorts: on average +1.33% for accuracy, +1% for precision, +1.33% for sensitivity, +1.67% for specificity. Considering the difference in phenotype classification inherent to a comparison among various international cohorts, and the genetic variability among different European sub-populations, the consistent increase in performances observed for the model with *IPGS* demonstrates that this score provides a robust index for predicting COVID-19 severity. As a further test for the importance of the *IPGS* score for predicting COVID-19 severity, the univariate logistic models were used on the overall set including both train and test cohorts to estimate the OR of severe COVID-19 for *IPGS*, age, and sex, separately. The test confirmed that severity was associated with *IPGS,* showing an OR of 2.32 (p<0.001, 95% confidence interval [1.79, 3.01]) with age, measured in decades, and sex, having OR of 1.89 (p<0.001, 95% confidence interval [1.79, 2.00]) and 2.99 (p<0.001, 95% confidence interval [2.58, 3.46]) respectively (Fig. 5E). The multivariate logistic regression using sex, age, and *IPGS* together, provided similar results reported in **Supplementary Table 9** confirming the goodness of the regressors’ OR. When adjusting for comorbidities, in the train cohort where the comorbidities were available, with a multivariable logistic model, OR of IPGS was 2.46 (p=0.05, 95% confidence interval [1.15, 5.25]) as shown in **Supplementary Table 10**. This result further confirms that IPGS is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 clinical severity. ### Advantages of IPGS and clinical interpretability of connected features We then wanted to compare the clinical outcome with the probability of severity obtained from three different models: IPGS alone, sex-age alone or combined model (represented as heatmap in Fig. 6). It appears evident that in a subset of patients, the 2 models based on sex-age alone and IPGS alone have a discordant prediction (left and right end of dendrogram in Fig. 6A). In these cases IPGS appears to be a relevant predictor of severity (Fig. 6A). This is in accordance with the above presented logistic regression analysis (Fig. 5E) that shows IPGS having an OR of 2.32 for severity. Moreover, the list of features on which the IPGS score is built, represent a biological handle for pathophysiological mechanisms and possible personalized adjuvant treatments. ![Figure 6.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F6.medium.gif) [Figure 6.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.03.21262611/F6) Figure 6. Clinically interpretability of IPGS. Panel **A** shows the GEN-COVID cohort dendrogram and heatmaps of the probabilities of severity based on the 3 different models: sex-age alone, IPGS alone and combined model. In the extreme ends of dendrogram (left and right) the probability of severity based on sex-age alone and IPGS alone is highly discordant (different colours). Selected examples corresponding to the arrows are illustrated in panels B-G. In each panel IPGS score, probabilities of severity and key features useful for bedside clinical management are shown. **B**) Male patient, in the 46-50 age range, treated with CPAP ventilation, tocilizumab, enoxaparin, hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir; no comorbidities except for asthma have been reported. The patient presented a rare *TLR7* mutation that leads to an impaired production of interferon gamma [12]. **C**) Male patient, in the 51-55 age range, treated with invasive mechanical ventilation, steroids and enoxaparin. He had among comorbidities obesity, anxiety, hypertension and cerebral ischemia. He was found to be homozygous for the *SELP* rs6127 (p.Asp603Asn). Homozygosity of Asparagine in position 603 of Selectin P makes this endothelial proteine more prone to clot formation and male patients more prone to COVID-19 thrombosis [18]. Hence the rationale for considering as putative adjuvant therapy in the management of similar cases the anti Selectin P antibodies, a drug already approved for vascular events of sickle cell anemia. **D**) Male patient, in the 51-55 age range, treated with CPAP ventilation, tocilizumab, steroids, enoxaparin, hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir; no comorbidities except for diabetes. He was found to have the androgen receptor polyQ repeats ≥23. The regular function of the androgen receptor is correlated with a beneficial immunomodulatory effect in those male patients in whom the increase in testosterone levels may overcome the receptor resistance. The rationale is to consider giving testosterone to those male subjects who cannot, on their own, raise the levels enough to overcome the receptor resistance due to poly-glutamine stretch longer than 23 repeats [16]. **E**) Female patient, in the 31-35 age range, treated with CPAP ventilation and steroids, enoxaparin and azithromycin; no comorbidities except for hypothyroidism. She was a carrier of an ultra rare mutation in *ADAMTS13*. Impaired function of ADAMTS13 leads to reduced cleavage of von Willebrand factor (vWF) and enhanced clot formation. The effect is enhanced in females and responsible for SARS-CoV-2 related thrombosis. Anti vWF immunoglobulines would be a putative therapeutic option to consider in similar cases. **F-G**) examples of low IPGS and related key features. **F)** Male patient, in the 81-85 age range, treated with low-flow oxygen. No information regarding pharmacological therapy during hospitalization is present. Among comorbidities: diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure and bowel cancer and steroids. He presented an ultra rare mutation in *ACE2*. **G)** Male patient, in the 86-90 age range, treated with low-flow oxygen, steroid, enoxaparin and ceftriaxone plus azithromycin. Among his comorbidities: colon diverticulosis with constipation?, benign prostatic hyperplasia?, anxious-depressive syndrome, sideropenic anemia. He was a carrier of an ultra rare mutation in *AGTR2*. For example, three male patients, within two distinct age ranges (46-50, 51-55) (**panels B, C and D)** with severe outcome (intubation and CPAP) are imperfectly represented by the sex-age model (probability of severity from 0,52 to 0,66) and better represented by the IPGS model (probability of severity from 0,91 to 0,95). The detected genetic variants that would allow to clinically consider putative personalized treatments in similar cases are: i) *TLR7* ultra rare mutation indicating to consider possible adjuvant treatment with IFN gamma administration [12]; ii) homozygosity 603Asn in *SELP* gene suggesting putative adjuvant treatment with anti selectin P autoantibodies (e.g. Crizanlizumab)[18] and iii) polyQ longer than 23 in *AR* gene suggesting to consider possible adjuvant treatment with testosterone [16]. In a female patient, within age range 31-35, the sex-age model showed a probability of severity of 0.17 (**panel D**) while the IPGS score was 336 corresponding to a probability of severity of 0.95. The patient had no comorbidities except for hypothyroidism. She underwent steroid treatment and CPAP ventilation. She was found to be carrier of *ADAMTS13* ultra rare mutation, being more susceptible to thrombosis (due to reduced capacity of cutting von Willebrand factor); she had indeed a high D-dimer value. Caplacizumab (an antibody anti vWF) would be an option to consider as possible adjuvant treatment in the clinical management of similar cases Two male patients, within two distinct age ranges (81-85, 86-90) (**panel F and G**) with a relatively mild respiratory outcome (hospitalised with low flow oxygen therapy) presented an IPGS score of -258 and -141 respectively. Their severity probabilities calculated on sex-age (0.9 and 0.94) do not mirror the relatively mild clinical outcome, which is instead better represented by the severity probability calculated in IPGS only (0.23 and 0.41). Those two patients presented ultra-rare variants in *ACE2* gene, likely responsible for reduced viral load [35], and in *AGTR2* gene, which reduced activity is known to prevent cystic fibrosis pulmonary manifestation [36]. ## Discussion The importance of combination of rare and low frequency variants has already been demonstrated to contribute to the prediction of susceptibility in other complex disorders [37–38]. Here we further expand this approach while demonstrating that ultra-rare, rare, low frequency, as well as common variants contribute to the likelihood of developing a severe form of COVID-19. Furthermore, we included in our analyses a calibration of the relative weight of the variants *vis-a-vis* their impact on disease severity: a single ultra-rare variant might well by itself cause a severe phenotype of COVID-19, while this is less probable for a common polymorphism, one that is likely to have a markedly less direct effect on protein functionality. We performed a first modellization of COVID-19 genetics using both rare and common variants [20]. Because feature selection methodologies are generally sensitive to allele frequency, the extraction was performed separately for rare (MAF <1/100) and common (MAF >1/100) variants. However, the methodology revealed the insight that low-frequency variants (MAF from 1% to 5%) were disadvantaged if selected together with common ones. Furthermore, for extracting Mendelian-like genes a threshold of MAF < 0.1% (ultra-rare variants) appeared more effective than MAF< 1% and all mutations in the *TLR7* gene that proved to have loss of function had indeed MAF< 1/1000 [12]. The model we arrived at, now considers separately ultra-rare, rare, low-frequency, and common variants. Similar to the classical PRS (Polygenic Risk Score), the proposed IPGS (*Integrated* PolyGenic Score) may prove reliable for assessing the probability of severe COVID-19 following infection by SARS-CoV-2 [21]. While PRS is based on common polymorphisms found at the genomic level with the majority of loci potentially conferring risk being not easily interpretable due to the uncertainty of linked genes, IPGS allows immediate biological interpretation because it only includes coding variants. Furthermore, as opposed to PRS, IPGS relies on both polymorphisms and rare variants is capable of differentially weighting features in an indirectly proportional way in respect to frequency and therefore to protein impact. Each patient indeed is assigned both a number and the list of her/his common and low-frequency polymorphisms relevant to COVID-19 supported by medically actionable information and of rare and ultra-rare variants conferring either risk of severity or protection from severe disease. Drawing on the entire picture presented through IPGS analysis, personalized adjuvant therapy could be envisaged. At the time of writing, a platform trial based on genetic markers is being discussed with the Italian Medicines Agency (EudraCT Number: 2021-002817-32). Within 25 reported genomic SNPs demonstrably related to COVID-19 susceptibility/severity, 5 were reported to be in LD with coding variants [9, 39]. The model presented here might provide useful information for uncovering the identity of the gene/coding variants responsible for COVID-19 susceptibility/severity linked to these genomic SNPs (Fig. 2D**)**. For example, on chromosome 12, the genes mapping to the locus tagged by rs10774671 [9] are both *OAS1* and *OAS3*. In *OAS3* the coding variant is an Arginine to Lysine substitution (rs1859330) in high LD (0.8) with the tag SNP. This polymorphism was already associated with viral infection [40] based on the presence of Lysine having been shown to lead to a decreased INF-γ production. In *OAS1* the haplotype (including 4 missense variants: G162S, A352T, R361T, and G397R), the splicing variant 1039-G>A (the reported genomic polymorphism itself), and the truncating mutation T359fs*26 are associated with severity and predicted to impair OAS1 function. Both OAS1 and OAS3 induce RNASEL, which in turn exerts antiviral activity. Further support for the role of the OAS/RNASEL axis is indicated by the presence of ultra-rare recessive variants. This innovative approach allowed us to better select genes located on the X chromosome related to COVID-19 that affect males and females in opposite ways (Fig. 2A and **Supplementary Tables 3 and 6**). Interestingly, many of these genes were previously confirmed or hypothesized to escape the X chromosome inactivation. With respect to these genes, females produce twice the levels of protein in comparison with males. Mutations in hemizygous state in males and heterozygous state in females appear silent until SARS-CoV-2 infection occurs. For example, *TLR7* and *TLR8* are selected for ultra-rare and associated with severity in males and with protection from severe disease in heterozygous females. We know that the activation of *TLR7/8* induces the production of type 1 and type 2 IFN as well as pro-inflammatory cytokines, where the production defect in hemizygous males leads to severe COVID-19. However, an excess of the sensor can also lead to damage from hyperinflammation. Therefore, the condition of carrier females is the more favorable state and has in fact been associated with mild COVID-19 [41] . Pathway analysis pointed to the relevance of obvious actors in COVID-19 pathology, such as immune cells and interferon signaling, but also to the important role of specific organs (brain, digestive tract, kidney, reproductive system) and functions (metabolism of lipids and steroids). The pathways identified through GSEA analyses reflected the multi-organ nature of the disease. In addition, our analyses reveal new candidate determinants of disease variability. The four pathways linked to cilium motility suggest a role for ciliated cells of the respiratory tract (and possibly others) in antiviral defense. The functionality of the clathrin-mediated endocytosis pathway may likely affect viral entry [42]. Likewise, endoplasmic reticulum associated protein degradation (ERAD), which is linked to autophagy and SARS-CoV-2 life-cycle [43], may also be relevant. Other pathways with a less obvious but potentially interesting role in the disease include cell adhesion and mechanical stimulus signaling. The strong link between the involved human biological pathways and COVID-19 pathogenicity support the hypothesis that the proposed *IPGS* equation may contribute significantly to predicting the disease severity of COVID-19. Indeed, an overall significant increase of performance was obtained in comparison with the model based on solely on age and sex. Furthermore, the *IPGS* is significantly associated with severity, showing an OR of 2.46 after adjustment for age, sex, and comorbidities. This indicates that IPGS is a novel prognostic factor that should be considered in the management of COVID-19 patients. Modelling precisely the role of the entire range of host genomics affecting disease susceptibility and severity in COVID-19 is critical to obtaining a complete biological understanding of the aetiology and pathogenicity of COVID-19 as well as other severe complex diseases. The application of *IPGS* based on Machine Learning principles within a post-Mendelian model allows us to more precisely identify the gene variants at play in COVID-19 as well as their specific roles, individually and in combination. This deep dive into the genetic architecture that allows for, contributes to, or even helps prevent diseases while increasing or decreasing their impact is critical for, and directly translatable into, (personalized) medicines development as well as prevention and treatment protocols. An integrated modelling of genetic variants based on a limited patient cohort, even limited in its geographical spread, may be sufficient for the development of diagnosis, and therapeutics across a wider range of populations. The advantage of this *IPGS* post-Mendelian model is that it learns and continues to learn as well as being a model from which we can obtain insights on the fundamental architecture of human genomics when confronted with severe and complex diseases. ## Supporting information Supplementary Fig. 1 [[supplements/262611_file09.jpg]](pending:yes) Supplementary Fig. 2 [[supplements/262611_file10.jpg]](pending:yes) Supplementary Fig. 3 [[supplements/262611_file11.jpg]](pending:yes) Supplementary Fig. 4 [[supplements/262611_file12.jpg]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 1 [[supplements/262611_file13.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 2 [[supplements/262611_file14.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 3a [[supplements/262611_file15.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 3b [[supplements/262611_file16.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 4a [[supplements/262611_file17.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 4b [[supplements/262611_file18.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 5a [[supplements/262611_file19.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 5b [[supplements/262611_file20.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 6a [[supplements/262611_file21.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 6b [[supplements/262611_file22.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 7 [[supplements/262611_file23.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 8 [[supplements/262611_file24.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 9 [[supplements/262611_file25.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 10 [[supplements/262611_file26.xlsx]](pending:yes) Supplementary Table 11 [[supplements/262611_file27.xlsx]](pending:yes) ## Data Availability The data and samples referenced here are housed in the GEN-COVID Patient Registry and the GEN-COVID Biobank and are available for consultation. You may contact the corresponding author, Prof. Alessandra Renieri (e-mail: alessandra.renieri{at}unisi.it). ## Supplementary Materials **Supplementary Figure 1. Barplots for 0.01 both** Barplot of significance values (NOM p-values, -log10 transformation) from GSEA analysis for all the pathways significant in both females (orange) and males (blue), p<0.01. Vertical dotted line indicates the adopted significance threshold. **Supplementary Figure 2. Representative heatmaps for 0.01_both** Heatmaps of the genes belonging to representative pathways significant in both females and males, p<0.01. The color gradient represents the weight of each gene, calculated as described in methods. **Supplementary Figure 3. Barplots for 0.005_any** Barplot of significance values (NOM p values, -log10 transformation) from GSEA analysis for all the pathways significant in either females (orange) or males (blue), p<0.005. Vertical dotted line indicates the adopted significance threshold. **Supplementary Figure 4. Representative heatmaps for 0.005_any** Heatmaps of the genes belonging to representative pathways significant in either females or males, p<0.005. The color gradient represents the weight of each gene, calculated as described in methods. **Supplementary Table 1.** Cohorts demography: information regarding studies contributing to this study. **Supplementary Table 2.** Post-Mendelian model: boolean representations **Supplementary Table 3a-b.** Ultra-rare features extracted in males; Ultra-rare features extracted in females **Supplementary Table 4a-b.** Rare features extracted in males; rare features extracted in females **Supplementary Table 5a-b.** Low-frequency features extracted in males; low-frequency features extracted in females **Supplementary Table 6a-b.** Common features extracted in males; Common features extracted in females **Supplementary Table 7.** List of genes and weights used for pathway analysis **Supplementary Table 8.** List of genes belonging to the significant pathways and their weights in Females and Males **Supplementary Table 9.** Association study with multivariate logistic regression **Supplementary Table 10.** Association study with multivariate logistic regression and comorbidities **Supplementary Table 11.** Common coding variants in LD with previously reported genomic SNPs ## AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS Conceptualization, Francesca Mari, Maddalena Fratelli, Simone Furini and Alessandra Renieri; Data curation, Ilaria Meloni, Susanna Croci, Maria Palmieri, Mirjam Lista, Giada Beligni; Formal analysis, Nicola Picchiotti, Elisa Benetti, Chiara Fallerini, Sergio Daga, Floriana Valentino, Margherita Baldassarri, Francesca Fava, Kristina Zguro, Marco Tanfoni, Francesca Colombo, Enrico Cabri, Maddalena Fratelli, Chiara Gabbi, Elisa Frullanti, GEN-COVID Multicenter Study, Marco Gori, Alessandra Renieri and Simone Furini; Funding acquisition, Alessandra Renieri and Francesca Mari; Methodology, Nicola Picchiotti, Elisa Benetti, Marco Tanfoni, Francesca Colombo, Enrico Cabri, Maddalena Fratelli, Chiara Gabbi, Stefania Mantovani, Sara Amitrano, Mirella Bruttini and Simone Furini; Project administration, Francesca Mari and Alessandra Renieri; Supervision, Francesca Mari, GEN-COVID Multicenter Study and Alessandra Renieri; Validation, Simone Furini, Guillaume Butler-Laporte, Brent Richards, Hugo Zeberg, Miklos Lipcsey, Michael Hultstrom, Kerstin U. Ludwig, Eva C. Schulte, Erola Pairo-Castineira, Mark Caulfield, Loukas Moutsianas, Athanasios Kousathanas, Susan Walker, John Kenneth Baillie, Axel Schmidt, Robert Frithiof; Writing – original draft, Nicola Picchiotti, Elisa Benetti, Chiara Fallerini, Sergio Daga, Margherita Baldassarri, Francesca Fava, Kristina Zguro, Sara Amitrano, Mirella Bruttini, Maria Palmieri, Mirjam Lista, Giada Beligni, Floriana Valentino, Susanna Croci, Ilaria Meloni, Francis P. Crawley, Marco Tanfoni, Francesca Colombo, Enrico Cabri, Maddalena Fratelli, Chiara Gabbi, Elisa Frullanti, Francesca Mari, GEN-COVID Multicenter Study, Marco Gori, Alessandra Renieri and Simone Furini. ## FUNDINGS MIUR project “Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2020” to Department of Medical Biotechnologies University of Siena, Italy (Italian D.L. n.18 March 17, 2020). Private donors for COVID-19 research. “Bando Ricerca COVID-19 Toscana” project to Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Senese. Charity fund 2020 from Intesa San Paolo dedicated to the project N. B/2020/0119 “Identificazione delle basi genetiche determinanti la variabilità clinica della risposta a COVID-19 nella popolazione italiana”. The Italian Ministry of University and Research for funding within the “Bando FISR 2020” in COVID-19 and the Istituto Buddista Italiano Soka Gakkai for funding the project “PAT-COVID: Host genetics and pathogenetic mechanisms of COVID-19” (ID n. 2020-2016_RIC_3). GenOMICC was funded by Sepsis Research (the Fiona Elizabeth Agnew Trust), the Intensive Care Society, a Wellcome-Beit Prize award to J. K. Baillie (Wellcome Trust 103258/Z/13/A) and a BBSRC Institute Program Support Grant to the Roslin Institute (BBS/E/D/20002172, BBS/E/D/10002070 and BBS/E/D/30002275). The Richards research group is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR: 365825; 409511, 100558), the McGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity (MI4), the Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, the Jewish General Hospital Foundation, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, the NIH Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Genome Québec, the Public Health Agency of Canada, McGill University, Cancer Research UK [grant number C18281/A29019] and the Fonds de Recherche Québec Santé (FRQS). JBR is supported by a FRQS Mérite Clinical Research Scholarship. Support from Calcul Québec and Compute Canada is acknowledged. TwinsUK is funded by the Welcome Trust, Medical Research Council, European Union, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)-funded BioResource, Clinical Research Facility and Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King’s College London. These funding agencies had no role in the design, implementation or interpretation of this study. JBR has served as an advisor to GlaxoSmithKline and Deerfield Capital. His institution has received investigator-initiated grant funding from Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline and Biogen for projects unrelated to this research. He is the founder of 5 Prime Sciences. SweCovid received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 824110, the SciLifeLab/KAW national Covid-19 research program project grants to MH (KAW 2020.0182 and KAW 2020.0241) and the Swedish Research Council grants to RF (2014-02569 and 2014-07606). Sequencing was performed by the SNP&SEQ Technology Platform in Uppsala. The facility is part of the National Genomics Infrastructure (NGI) Sweden and Science for Life Laboratory. The SNP&SEQ Platform is supported by the Swedish Research Council and the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation. ## INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD STATEMENT The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. The GEN-COVID is a multicentre academic observational study that was approved by the Internal Review Boards (IRB) of each participating centre (protocol code 16917, dated March 16, 2020 for GEN-COVID at the University Hospital of Siena). BQC19 received ethical approval from the Jewish General Hospital (JGH) research ethics board (2020-2137). The Swedish part of the study was performed at the general intensive care unit (ICU) of Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden (a tertiary hospital) and approved by the National Ethical Review Agency (No. 2020-01623). The Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent revisions were followed. DeCOI received ethical approval by the Ethical Review Board (ERB) of the participating hospitals/centres (Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany; Medical Faculty Bonn, Bonn, Germany; Medical Board of the Saarland, Germany; University Duisburg-Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty Duesseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany). GenOMICC and ISARIC4C were approved by the appropriate research ethics committees (Scotland, 15/SS/0110; England, Wales and Northern Ireland, 19/WM/0247). ## INFORMED CONSENT STATEMENT The patients were informed of this research and agreed to it through the informed consent process. ## CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare no conflict interests. ## DATA AVAILABILITY AND DATA SHARING STATEMENT The data and samples referenced here are housed in the GEN-COVID Patient Registry and the GEN-COVID Biobank and are available for consultation. You may contact the corresponding author, Prof. Alessandra Renieri (e-mail: alessandra.renieri{at}unisi.it). **❖ GEN-COVID Multicenter Study ([https://sites.google.com/dbm.unisi.it/gen-covid](https://sites.google.com/dbm.unisi.it/gen-covid))** Francesca Montagnani1,27, Mario Tumbarello1,27, Ilaria Rancan1,27, Massimiliano Fabbiani27, Barbara Rossetti27, Laura Bergantini28, Miriana D’Alessandro28, Paolo Cameli28, David Bennett28, Federico Anedda29, Simona Marcantonio29, Sabino Scolletta29, Federico Franchi29, Maria Antonietta Mazzei30, Susanna Guerrini30, Edoardo Conticini31, Luca Cantarini31, Bruno Frediani31, Danilo Tacconi32, Chiara Spertilli Raffaelli32, Marco Feri33, Alice Donati33, Raffaele Scala34, Luca Guidelli34, Genni Spargi35, Marta Corridi35, Cesira Nencioni36, Leonardo Croci36, Gian Piero Caldarelli37, Maurizio Spagnesi38, Davide Romani38, Paolo Piacentini38, Maria Bandini38, Elena Desanctis38, Silvia Cappelli38, Anna Canaccini39, Agnese Verzuri39, Valentina Anemoli39, Manola Pisani39, Agostino Ognibene40, Alessandro Pancrazzi40, Maria Lorubbio40, Massimo Vaghi41, Antonella D’Arminio Monforte42, Federica Gaia Miraglia42, Mario U. Mondelli43,44,, Massimo Girardis45, Sophie Venturelli45, Stefano Busani45, Andrea Cossarizza46, Andrea Antinori47, Alessandra Vergori47, Arianna Emiliozzi47, Stefano Rusconi48,49, Matteo Siano49, Arianna Gabrieli49, Agostino Riva48,49, Daniela Francisci50,51, Elisabetta Schiaroli50, Francesco Paciosi50, Andrea Tommasi50, Pier Giorgio Scotton52, Francesca Andretta52, Sandro Panese53, Stefano Baratti53, Renzo Scaggiante54, Francesca Gatti54, Saverio Giuseppe Parisi55, Francesco Castelli56, Eugenia Quiros-Roldan56, Melania Degli Antoni56, Isabella Zanella57,58, Matteo Della Monica59, Carmelo Piscopo59, Mario Capasso60,61,62, Roberta Russo60,61, Immacolata Andolfo60,61, Achille Iolascon60,61, 61, Giuseppe Fiorentino63, Massimo Carella64, Marco Castori64, Filippo Aucella65, Pamela Raggi66, Rita Perna66, Matteo Bassetti67,68, Antonio Di Biagio67,68, Maurizio Sanguinetti69,70, Luca Masucci69,70, Alessandra Guarnaccia69, Serafina Valente71, Oreste De Vivo71, Gabriella Doddato1,2, Rossella Tita5, Annarita Giliberti1,2, Maria Antonietta Mencarelli5, Caterina Lo Rizzo5, Anna Maria Pinto5, Valentina Perticaroli1,2,5, Francesca Ariani1,2,5, Miriam Lucia Carriero1,2, Laura Di Sarno1,2, Diana Alaverdian1,2, Elena Bargagli28, Marco Mandalà72, Alessia Giorli72, Lorenzo Salerni72, Patrizia Zucchi73, Pierpaolo Parravicini73, Elisabetta Menatti74, Tullio Trotta75, Ferdinando Giannattasio75, Gabriella Coiro75, Fabio Lena76, Gianluca Lacerenza76, Domenico A. Coviello77, Cristina Mussini78, Enrico Martinelli79, Sandro Mancarella80, Luisa Tavecchia80, Mary Ann Belli80, Lia Crotti81,82,83,84,85, Gianfranco Parati81,67, Maurizio Sanarico86, Francesco Raimondi87, Filippo Biscarini88, Alessandra Stella88, Marco Rizzi89, Franco Maggiolo89, Diego Ripamonti89, Claudia Suardi90, Tiziana Bachetti91, Maria Teresa La Rovere92, Simona Sarzi-Braga93, Maurizio Bussotti94, Katia Capitani3,95, Simona Dei96, Sabrina Ravaglia97, Rosangela Artuso98, Elena Andreucci98, Giulia Gori98, Angelica Pagliazzi98, Erika Fiorentini98, Antonio Perrella99, Francesco Bianchi1,99, Paola Bergomi100, Emanuele Catena100, Riccardo Colombo100, Sauro Luchi101, Giovanna Morelli101, Paola Petrocelli101, Sarah Iacopini101, Sara Modica101, Silvia Baroni102, Francesco Vladimiro Segala103, Francesco Menichetti104, Marco Falcone104, Giusy Tiseo104, Chiara Barbieri104, Tommaso Matucci104, Davide Grassi105, Claudio Ferri106, Franco Marinangeli107, Francesco Brancati108, Antonella Vincenti109, Valentina Borgo109, Lombardi Stefania109, Mirco Lenzi109, Massimo Antonio Di Pietro110, Francesca Vichi110, Benedetta Romanin110, Letizia Attala110, Cecilia Costa110, Andrea Gabbuti110, Menè Roberto81,82, Umberto Zuccon111, Lucia Vietri111, Stefano Ceri112, Pietro Pinoli112, Patrizia Casprini113, Giuseppe Merla114,115, Gabriella Maria Squeo114, Marcello Maffezzoni116, Raffaele Bruno117,118, Marco Vecchia117,, Marta Colaneri117, Serena Ludovisi119 27) Department of Medical Sciences, Infectious and Tropical Diseases Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena, Italy 28) Unit of Respiratory Diseases and Lung Transplantation, Department of Internal and Specialist Medicine, University of Siena, Italy 29) Dept of Emergency and Urgency, Medicine, Surgery and Neurosciences, Unit of Intensive Care Medicine, Siena University Hospital, Italy 30) Department of Medical, Surgical and Neuro Sciences and Radiological Sciences, Unit of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Siena, Italy 31) Rheumatology Unit, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Policlinico Le Scotte, Italy 32) Department of Specialized and Internal Medicine, Infectious Diseases Unit, San Donato Hospital Arezzo, Italy 33) Dept of Emergency, Anesthesia Unit, San Donato Hospital, Arezzo, Italy 34) Department of Specialized and Internal Medicine, Pneumology Unit and UTIP, San Donato Hospital, Arezzo, Italy 35) Department of Emergency, Anesthesia Unit, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy 36) Department of Specialized and Internal Medicine, Infectious Diseases Unit, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy 37) Clinical Chemical Analysis Laboratory, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy 38) Dipartimento di Prevenzione, Azienda USL Toscana Sud Est, Italy 39) Dipartimento Tecnico-Scientifico Territoriale, Azienda USL Toscana Sud Est, Italy 40) Clinical Chemical Analysis Laboratory, San Donato Hospital, Arezzo, Italy 41) Chirurgia Vascolare, Ospedale Maggiore di Crema, Italy 42) Department of Health Sciences, Clinic of Infectious Diseases, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, University of Milan, Italy 43) Division of Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Department of Medical Sciences and Infectious Diseases, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo,Pavia, Italy 44) Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pavia, Italy 45) Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy 46) Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Children and Adults, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy 47) HIV/AIDS Department, National Institute for Infectious Diseases, IRCCS, Lazzaro Spallanzani, Rome, Italy 48) III Infectious Diseases Unit, ASST-FBF-Sacco, Milan, Italy 49) Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Luigi Sacco, University of Milan, Milan, Italy 50) Infectious Diseases Clinic, Department of Medicine 2, Azienda Ospedaliera di Perugia and University of Perugia, Santa Maria Hospital, Perugia, Italy 51) Infectious Diseases Clinic, “Santa Maria” Hospital, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy 52) Department of Infectious Diseases, Treviso Hospital, Local Health Unit 2 Marca Trevigiana, Treviso, Italy 53) Clinical Infectious Diseases, Mestre Hospital, Venezia, Italy. 54) Infectious Diseases Clinic, ULSS1, Belluno, Italy 55) Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Padova, Italy 56) Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, University of Brescia and ASST Spedali Civili Hospital, Brescia, Italy 57) Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, Italy; 58) Clinical Chemistry Laboratory, Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics Section, Diagnostic Department, ASST Spedali Civili di Brescia, Italy 59) Medical Genetics and Laboratory of Medical Genetics Unit, A.O.R.N. “Antonio Cardarelli”, Naples, Italy 60) Department of Molecular Medicine and Medical Biotechnology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy 61) CEINGE Biotecnologie Avanzate, Naples, Italy 62) IRCCS SDN, Naples, Italy 63) Unit of Respiratory Physiopathology, AORN dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy 64) Division of Medical Genetics, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy 65) Department of Medical Sciences, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy 66) Clinical Trial Office, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy 67) Department of Health Sciences, University of Genova, Genova, Italy 68) Infectious Diseases Clinic, Policlinico San Martino Hospital, IRCCS for Cancer Research Genova, Italy 69) Microbiology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of Medicine, Rome, Italy 70) Department of Laboratory Sciences and Infectious Diseases, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy 71) Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, University of Siena, Siena, Italy 72) Otolaryngology Unit, University of Siena, Italy 73) Department of Internal Medicine, ASST Valtellina e Alto Lario, Sondrio, Italy 74) Study Coordinator Oncologia Medica e Ufficio Flussi Sondrio, Italy 75) First Aid Department, Luigi Curto Hospital, Polla, Salerno, Italy 76) Department of Pharmaceutical Medicine, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy. 77) U.O.C. Laboratorio di Genetica Umana, IRCCS Istituto G. Gaslini, Genova, Italy 78) Infectious Diseases Clinics, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy 79) Department of Respiratory Diseases, Azienda Ospedaliera di Cremona, Cremona, Italy 80) U.O.C. Medicina, ASST Nord Milano, Ospedale Bassini, Cinisello Balsamo (MI), Italy 81) Istituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Department of Cardiovascular, Neural and Metabolic Sciences, San Luca Hospital, Milan, Italy 82) Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy 83) Istituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Center for Cardiac Arrhythmias of Genetic Origin, Milan, Italy 84) Istituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Laboratory of Cardiovascular Genetics, Milan, Italy 85) Member of the European Reference Network for Rare, Low Prevalence and Complex Diseases of the Heart-ERN GUARD-Heart 86) Independent Data Scientist, Milan, Italy 87) Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy 88) CNR-Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Biologia e Biotecnologia Agraria (IBBA), Milano, Italy 89) Unit of Infectious Diseases, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy 90) Fondazione per la ricerca Ospedale di Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy 91) Direzione Scientifica, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Pavia, Italy 92) Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Department of Cardiology, Institute of Montescano, Pavia, Italy 93) Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, IRCCS, Department of Cardiac Rehabilitation, Institute of Tradate (VA), Italy 94) Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Department of Cardiology, Institute of Milan, Milan, Italy 95) Core Research Laboratory, ISPRO, Florence, Italy 96) Health Management, Azienda USL Toscana Sudest, Tuscany, Italy 97) IRCCS C. Mondino Foundation, Pavia, Italy 98) Medical Genetics Unit, Meyer Children’s University Hospital, Florence, Italy 99) Department of Medicine, Pneumology Unit, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy. 100) Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, Luigi Sacco Hospital, Polo Universitario, University of Milan, Milan 101) Infectious Disease Unit, Hospital of Lucca, Italy 102) Department of Diagnostic and Laboratory Medicine, Institute of Biochemistry and Clinical Biochemistry, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. 103) Clinic of Infectious Diseases, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy 104) Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Infectious Diseases Unit, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy 105) Dept. of Clinical Medicine, Public Health, Life and Environment Sciences, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy 106) Department of Clinical Medicine, Public Health, Life and Environment Sciences, University of L’Aquila, Italy 107) Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy 108) Medical Genetics Unit, Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy 109) Infectious Disease Unit, Hospital of Massa, Italy 110) Infectious Diseases Unit, Santa Maria Annunziata Hospital, USL Centro, Florence, Italy 111) Respiratory Diseases Unit, “Santa Maria degli Angeli” Hospital, Pordenone, Italy 112) Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering (DEIB), Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy. 113) Laboratory of Clinical Pathology and Immunoallergy, Florence-Prato, Italy 114) Laboratory of Regulatory and Functional Genomics, Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo (Foggia), Italy 115) Department of Molecular Medicine and Medical Biotechnology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy. 116) University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy 117) Division of Infectious Diseases I, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy 118) Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic, and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy 119) Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. **◇ WES/WGS working group within the HGI ([https://www.covid19hg.org/projects/](https://www.covid19hg.org/projects/))** **-The genetic predisposition to severe COVID-19 (SweCovid)** Yanara Marincevic-Zuniga120, Jessica Nordlund120, Tomas Luther16, Anders Larsson121, Katja Hanslin16, Anna Gradin16, Sarah Galien16, Sara Bulow Anderberg16, Jacob Rosén16, Sten Rubertsson16, Hugo Zeberg15,, Robert Frithiof16, Miklós Lipcsey16,17, Michael Hultström16,18 120) Department of Medical Sciences, Science for Life Laboratory, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 121) Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Chemistry, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden ❈ **GenOMICC Consortium** - **GenOMICC co-investigators** Sara Clohisey25, Peter Horby122, Johnny Millar25, Julian Knight123, Hugh Montgomery124, David Maslove125, Lowell Ling126, Alistair Nichol127, Charlotte Summers128, Tim Walsh26, Charles Hinds129, Malcolm G. Semple130,131, Peter J.M. Openshaw132,133, Manu Shankar-Hari134, Antonia Ho135, Danny McAuley1367,1378, Chris Ponting24, Kathy Rowan1389, J. Kenneth Baillie24,25,26. - **Central management and laboratory team** Fiona Griffiths25, Wilna Oosthuyzen25 Jen Meikle25, Paul Finernan25, James Furniss25, Ellie Mcmaster25, Andy Law25, Sara Clohisey25, J. Kenneth Baillie24,25,26, Trevor Paterson25, Tony Wackett25, Ruth Armstrong25, Lee Murphy139, Angie Fawkes139, Richard Clark139, Audrey Coutts139, Lorna Donnelly139, Tammy Gilchrist139, Katarzyna Hafezi139, Louise Macgillivray139, Alan Maclean139, Sarah McCafferty139, Kirstie Morrice139, Jane Weaver25, Ceilia Boz25, Ailsa Golightly25, Mari Ward25, Hanning Mal25, Helen Szoor-McElhinney25, Adam Brown25, Ross Hendry25, Andrew Stenhouse25, Louise Cullum25, Dawn Law25, Sarah Law25, Rachel Law25, Max Head Fourman25, Maaike Swets25, Nicky Day25, Filip Taneski25, Esther Duncan25, Marie Zechner25, Nicholas Parkinson25. **- Data analysis team** Erola Pairo-Castineira24,25, Sara Clohisey25, Lucija Klaric24, Andrew D. Bretherick24, Konrad Rawlik25, Dorota Pasko140, Susan Walker140, Nick Parkinson25, Max Head Fourman25, Clark D Russell25,141, James Furniss25, Anne Richmond24, Elvina Gountouna142, David Harrison138, Bo Wang24, Yang Wu143, Alison Meynert24, Athanasios Kousathanas140, Loukas Moutsianas140, Zhijian Yang144, Ranran Zhai144, Chenqing Zheng144, Graeme Grimes24, Jonathan Millar25, Barbara Shih25, Marie Zechner25, Jian Yang145,146, Xia Shen144,147,148, Chris P. Ponting2, Albert Tenesa2,25,147, Kathy Rowan138, Andrew Law25, Veronique Vitart24, James F. Wilson24,147, J. Kenneth Baillie24,25,26. **- Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK** D Collier150, S Wood149, A Zak149, C Borra149, M Matharu149, P May149, Z Alldis149, O Mitchelmore149, R Bowles149, A Easthorpe149, F Bibi149, I Lancoma-Malcolm149, J Gurasashvili149, J Pheby149, J Shiel149, M Bolton149, M Patel149, M Taylor149, O Zongo149, P Ebano149, P Harding149, R Astin-Chamberlain149, Y Choudhury149, A Cox149, D Kallon149, M Burton149, R Hall149, S Blowes149, Z Prime149, J Biddle149, O Prysyazhna149, T Newman149, C Tierney149, J Kassam149. **- Guys and St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK** M Shankar-Hari150, M Ostermann150, S Campos150, A Bociek150, R Lim150, N Grau150, T O Jones150, C Whitton150, M Marotti40, G Arbane150. **- James Cook University Hospital, Middlesburgh, UK** S. Bonner151, K Hugill151, J Reid151. **- The Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK** I Welters152, V Waugh152, K Williams152, D Shaw152, J Fernandez Roman152, M Lopez Martinez152, E Johnson152, A Waite152, B Johnson152, O Hamilton152, S Mulla152. - **King’s College Hospital, London, UK** M McPhail153, J Smith153. - **Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK** J K Baillie23,24,25, L Barclay154, D Hope154, C McCulloch154, L McQuillan154, S Clark154, J Singleton154, K Priestley154, N Rea154, M Callaghan154, R Campbell154, G Andrew154, L Marshall154. - **John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK** S McKechnie155, P Hutton155, A Bashyal 155, N Davidson155. - **Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, UK** C Summers155, P Polgarova155, K Stroud155, N Pathan155, K Elston155, S Agrawal155. - **Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK** C Battle157, L Newey157, T Rees157, R Harford157, E Brinkworth157, M Williams157, C Murphy157. - **Ashford and St Peter’s Hospital, Surrey, UK** I White158, M Croft158. - **Royal Stoke University Hospital, Staffordshire, UK** N Bandla159, M Gellamucho159, J Tomlinson159, H Turner159, M Davies159, A Quinn159, I Hussain159, C Thompson159, H Parker159, R Bradley159, R Griffiths159. - **Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK** J. Scriven160, J Gill160. - **Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK** A Puxty161, S Cathcart161, D Salutous161, L Turner161, K Duffy161, K Puxty161. - **Kingston Hospital, Surrey, UK** A Joseph162, R Herdman-Grant162, R Simms162, A Swain162, A Naranjo162, R Crowe162, K Sollesta162, A Loveridge162, D Baptista162, E Morino162. - **The Tunbridge Wells Hospital and Maidstone Hospital, Kent, UK** M Davey163, D Golden163, J Jones163. - **North Middlesex University Hospital NHS trust, London, UK** J Moreno Cuesta164, A Haldeos164, D Bakthavatsalam164, R Vincent164, M Elhassan164, K Xavier164, A Ganesan164, D Purohit M Abdelrazik164. - **Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford, UK** J Morgan165, L Akeroyd165, S Bano165, D Warren165, M Bromley165, K Sellick165, L Gurr165, B Wilkinson165, V Nagarajan165, P Szedlak165. **- Blackpool Victoria Hospital, Blackpool, UK** J Cupitt166, E Stoddard166, L Benham166, S Preston166, N Slawson166, Z Bradshaw166, J brown166, M Caswell166, SMelling166. - **Countess of Chester Hospital, Chester, UK** P Bamford167, M Faulkner167, K Cawley167, H Jeffrey167, E London167, H Sainsbury167, I Nagra167, F Nasir167, Ce Dunmore167, R Jones167, A Abraheem 167, M Al-Moasseb167, R Girach167. - **Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK** C Brantwood168, P Alexander 168, J Bradley-Potts168, S Allen168, T Felton168. - **St George’s Hospital, London, UK** S Manna169, S Farnell-Ward169, S Leaver169, J Queiroz169, E Maccacari169, D Dawson169, C Castro Delgado169, R Pepermans Saluzzio169, O Ezeobu169, L Ding169, C Sicat169, R Kanu169, G Durrant169, J Texeira169, A Harrison169, T Samakomva169. **- Good Hope Hospital, Birmingham, UK** J Scriven170, H Willis170, B Hopkins170, L Thrasyvoulou170. - **Stepping Hill Hospital, Stockport, UK** M Jackson171, A Zaki 171, C Tibke171, S Bennett171, W Woodyatt171, A Kent 171, E Goodwin171. - **Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK** C Brandwood172, R Clark172, L Smith172. - **Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley, UK** K Rooney173, N Thomson173, N Rodden173, E Hughes173, D McGlynn173, C Clark173, P Clark173, L Abel173, R Sundaram173, L Gemmell173, M Brett173, J Hornsby173, P MacGoey173, R Price173, B Digby173, P O’Neil173, P McConnell173, P Henderson173. - **Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK** S Henderson174, M Sim174, S Kennedy-Hay174, C McParland174, L Rooney174, N Baxter174. - **Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK** D Pogson175, S Rose175, Z Daly175, L Brimfield175. - **BHRUT (Barking Havering) - Queens Hospital and King George Hospital, Essex, UK** M K Phull176, M Hussain176, T Pogreban176, L Rosaroso176, E Salciute L Grauslyte176. - **University College Hospital, London, UK** D Brealey177, E Wraith177, N MacCallum177, G Bercades177, I Hass177, D Smyth177, A Reyes 177, G Martir177. - **Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK** I D Clement178, K Webster178, C Hays178, A Gulati 178. - **Western Sussex Hospitals, West Sussex, UK** L Hodgson**179**, M Margarson179, R Gomez179, Y Baird179, Y Thirlwall179, L Folkes179, A Butler179, E Meadows179, S Moore179, D Raynard179, H Fox179, L Riddles179, K King179, S Kimber179, G Hobden179, A McCarthy179, V Cannons179, I Balagosa179, I Chadbourn179, A Gardner 179. - **Salford Royal Hospital, Manchester, UK** D Horner180, D McLaughlanv180, B Charles180, N Proudfoot180, T Marsden180, L Mc Morrow180, B Blackledge180, J Pendlebury180, A Harvey180, E Apetri180, C Basikolo180, L Catlow180, R Doonan180, K Knowles180, S Lee180, D Lomas180, C Lyons180, J Perez180, M Poulaka180, M Slaughter180, K Slevin180, M Taylor180, V Thomas180, D Walker180, J Harris180. - **The Royal Oldham Hospital, Manchester, UK** A Drummond181, R Tully181, J Dearden181, J Philbin181, S Munt181, C Rishton181, G O’Connor181, M Mulcahy181, E Dobson181, J Cuttler181, M Edward181. - **Pinderfields General Hospital, Wakefield, UK** A Rose182, B Sloan182, S Buckley182, H Brooke182, E Smithson182, R Charlesworth182, R Sandu182, M Thirumaran182, V Wagstaff182, J Cebrian Suarez182. - **Basildon Hospital, Basildon, UK** A Kaliappan183, M Vertue183, A Nicholson 183, J Riches183, A Solesbury183, L Kittridge183, M Forsey183, G Maloney183. - **University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK** J Cole184, M Davies184, R Davies184, H Hill184, E Thomas184, A Williams 184, D Duffin184, B Player184. **- Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK** J Radhakrishnan185, S Gibson185, A Lyle 185, F McNeela185. - **Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK** B Patel186, M Gummadi186, G Sloane186, N Dormand186, S Salmi186, Z Farzad186, D Cristiano186, K Liyanage186, V Thwaites186, M Varghese186. - **Nottingham University Hospital, Nottingham, UK** M Meredith187. - **Royal Hallamshire Hospital and Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK** G Mills188, J Willson188, K Harrington188, B Lenagh188, K Cawthron188, S Masuko188, A Raithatha188, K Bauchmuller188, N Ahmad188, J Barker188, Y Jackson188, F Kibutu188, S Bird188. - **Royal Hampshire County Hospital, Hampshire, UK** G Watson189, J Martin189, E Bevan189, C Wrey Brown189, D Trodd189. - **Queens Hospital Burton, Burton-On-Trent, UK** K English190, G Bell190, L Wilcox190, A Katary 190. - **New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK** S Gopal191, V Lake191, N Harris191, S Metherell191, E Radford191. - **Heartlands Hospital, Birmingham, UK** J Scriven192, F Moore192, H Bancroft192, J Daglish192, M Sangombe192, M Carmody192, J Rhodes192, M Bellamy192. - **Walsall Manor Hospital, Walsall, UK** A Garg193, A Kuravi 193, E Virgilio193, P Ranga193, J Butler193, L Botfield193, C Dexter193, J Fletcher193. - **Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Buckinghamshire, UK** P Shanmugasundaram194, G Hambrook194, I Burn194, K Manso194, D Thornton194, J Tebbutt194, R Penn194. - **Sandwell General Hospital, Birmingham, UK** J Hulme195, S Hussain195, Z Maqsood195, S Joseph195, J Colley195, A Hayes195, C Ahmed195, R Haque195, S Clamp195, R Kumar195, M Purewal195, B Baines195. - **Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, Berkshire, UK** M Frise196, N Jacques196, H Coles196, J Caterson196, S Gurung Rai196, M Brunton196, E Tilney196, L Keating196, A Walden196. - **Charing Cross Hospital, St Mary’s Hospital and Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK** D Antcliffe197, A Gordon 197, M Templeton197, R Rojo197, D Banach197, S Sousa Arias197, Z Fernandez197, P Coghlan197. - **Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary, Dumfries, UK** D Williams198, C Jardine198. - **Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol, UK** J Bewley199, K Sweet199, L Grimmer199, R Johnson199, Z Garland199, B Gumbrill199. - **Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK** C Phillips200, L Ortiz-Ruiz de Gordoa200, E Peasgood200. - **Whiston Hospital, Prescot, UK** A Tridente201, K Shuker S Greer201. - **Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Cardiff, UK** C Lynch202, C Pothecary202, L Roche202, B Deacon202, K Turner202, J Singh202, G Sera Howe202. - **King’s Mill Hospital, Nottingham, UK** P Paul203, M Gill203, I Wynter203, V Ratnam203, S Shelton203. - **Fairfield General Hospital, Bury, UK** J Naisbitt204, J Melville204. - **Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK** R Baruah205, S Morrison205. - **Northwick Park Hospital, London, UK** A McGregor206, V Parris206, M Mpelembue206, S Srikaran206, C Dennis206, A Sukha 206. - **Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK** A Williams207, M Verlande207. - **Royal Derby Hospital, Derby, UK** K Holding208, K Riches208, C Downes208, C Swan208. - **Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, UK** A Rostron209, A Roy 209, L Woods209, S Cornell209, F Wakinshaw209. - **Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK** B Creagh-Brown210, H Blackman210, A Salberg210, E Smith210, S Donlon210, S Mtuwa210, N Michalak-Glinska210, S Stone210, C Beazley210, V Pristopan210. - **Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK** N Nikitas211, L Lankester211, C Wells211. - **Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, UK** A S Raj212, K Fletcher212, R Khade212, G Tsinaslanidis212. - **Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy, UK** M McMahon213, S Fowler213, A McGregor 213, T Coventry213. - **Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, UK** R Stewart214, L Wren214, E Mwaura214, L Mew214, A Rose214, D Scaletta214, F Williams214. - **Barnsley Hospital, Barnsley, UK** K Inweregbu215, A Nicholson215, N Lancaster215, M Cunningham215, A Daniels215, L Harrison215, S Hope215, S Jones215, A Crew215, G Wray215, J Matthews215, R Crawley215. - **York Hospital, York, UK** J Carter216, I Birkinshaw216, J Ingham216, Z Scott216, K Howard216, R Joy216, S Roche216. - **University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton on Tees, UK** M Clark217, S Purvis217. - **University Hospital Wishaw, Wishaw, UK** A Morrison218, D Strachan218, M Taylor218, S Clements218, K Black218. **- Whittington Hospital, London, UK** C Parmar219, A Altabaibeh 219, K Simpson219, L Mostoles219, K Gilbert219, L Ma219, A Alvaro 219. **- Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK** M Thomas220, B Faulkner220, R Worner220, K Hayes220, E Gendall220, H Blakemore220, B Borislavova220, E Goff220. **- The Royal Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, UK** A Vuylsteke221, L Mwaura221, J Zamikula221, L Garner221, A Mitchell221, S Mepham221, L Cagova221, A Fofano221, H Holcombe221, K Praman221. **- Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, UK** T Szakmany222, A E Heron 222, S Cherian222, S Cutler222, A Roynon-Reed222. **- Norfolk and Norwich University hospital (NNUH), Norwich, UK** G Randell223, K Convery223, K Stammers D Fottrell-Gould223, L Hudig223, J Keshet-price223. **- Great Ormond St Hospital and UCL Great Ormond St Institute of Child Health NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK** M Peters224, L O’Neill224, S Ray224, H Belfield224, T McHugh224, G Jones224, O Akinkugbe224, A Tomas224, E Abaleke224, E Beech224, H Meghari224, S Yussuf224, A Bamford 224. **- Airedale General Hospital, Keighley, UK** B Hairsine225, E Dooks225, F Farquhar225, S Packham225, H Bates225, C McParland225, L Armstrong 225. **- Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK** C Kaye226, A Allan 226, J Medhora226, J Liew226, A Botello226, F Anderson226. **- Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK** R Cusack227, H Golding227, K Prager227, T Williams227, S Leggett227, K Golder227, M Male227, O Jones227, K Criste227, M Marani227. **- Russell’s Hall Hospital, Dudley, UK** V. Anumakonda228, V Amin 228, K Karthik228, R Kausar228, E Anastasescu228, K Reid228, M. Jacqui228. **- Rotherham General Hospital, Rotherham, UK** A Hormis229, R Walker229, D Collier229. **- North Manchester General Hospital, Manchester, UK** T Duncan230, A Uriel 230, A Ustianowski 230, H T-Michael230, M Bruce230, K Connolly230, K Smith230. **- Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital, Basingstoke, UK** R Partridge231, D Griffin231, M McDonald231, N Muchenje231. **- Royal Free Hospital, London, UK** D Martin232, H Filipe232, C Eastgate232, C Jackson232. **- Hull Royal Infirmary, Hull, UK** A Gratrix233, L Foster233, V Martinson233, E Stones233, Caroline Abernathy233, P Parkinson233. **- Harefield Hospital, London, UK** A Reed234, C Prendergast234, P Rogers234, M Woodruff234, R Shokkar234, S Kaul234, A Barron 234, C Collins234. **- Chesterfield Royal Hospital Foundation Trust, Chesterfield, UK** S Beavis235, A Whileman 235, K Dale235, J Hawes235, K Pritchard235, R Gascoyne235, L Stevenson235. **- Barnet Hospital, London, UK** R Jha236, L Lim236, V Krishnamurthy236. **- Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, UK** R Parker237, I Turner-Bone237, L Wilding237, A Reddy 237. **- St James’s University Hospital and Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK** S Whiteley238, E Wilby238, C Howcroft238, A Aspinwall 238, S Charlton238, B Ogg238. **- Glan Clwyd Hospital, Bodelwyddan, UK** D Menzies239, R Pugh239, E Allan239, R Lean239, F Davies239, J Easton239, X Qiu239, S Kumar239, K Darlington239. **- University Hospital Crosshouse, Kilmarnock, UK** G Houston240, P O’Brien240, T Geary240, J Allan240, A Meikle240. **- Royal Bolton Hospital, Bolton, UK** G Hughes241, M Balasubramaniam241, S Latham241, E McKenna241, R Flanagan241. **- Princess of Wales Hospital, Llantrisant, UK** S Sathe242, E Davies242, L Roche242. **- Pilgrim Hospital, Lincoln, UK** M Chablani243, A Kirkby 243, K Netherton243, S Archer243. **- Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, North Shields, UK** B Yates244, C Ashbrook-Raby244. **- Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, UK** S Cole245, M Casey245, L Cabrelli245, S Chapman245, M Casey245, P Austin245, A Hutcheon245, C Whyte245, C Almaden-Boyle245. **- Lister Hospital, Stevenage, UK** N Pattison246, C Cruz246. **- Bedford Hospital, Bedford, UK** A Vochin247, H Kent247, A Thomas247, S Murdoch247, B David247, M Penacerrada247, G Lubimbi247, V Bastion247, R Wulandari247, J Valentine247, D Clarke247. **- Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK** A Serrano-Ruiz248, S Hierons248, L Ramos248, C Demetriou248, S Mitchard248, K White248. **- Royal Bournemouth Hospital, Bournemouth, UK** N White249, S Pitts249, D Branney249, J Frankham249. **- The Great Western Hospital, Swindon, UK** M Watters250, H Langton250, R Prout250. **- Watford General Hospital, Watford, UK** V Page251, T Varghes251. **- University Hospital North Durham, Darlington, UK** A Cowton252, A Kay 252, K Potts252, M Birt252, M Kent252, A Wilkinson252. **- Tameside General Hospital, Ashton Under Lyne, UK** E Jude253, V Turner253, H Savill253, J McCormick253, M Clark253, M Coulding253, S Siddiqui253, O Mercer253, H Rehman253, D Potla253. **- Princess Royal Hospital, Telford and Royal Shrewsbury Hospital, Shrewsbury, UK** N Capps254, D Donaldson254, J Jones254, H Button254, T Martin254, K Hard254, A Agasou254, L Tonks254, T Arden254, P Boyle254, M Carnahan254, J Strickley254, C Adams254, D Childs254, R Rikunenko254, M Leigh254, M Breekes254, R Wilcox254, A Bowes254, H Tiveran254, F Hurford254, J Summers254, A Carter254, Y Hussain254, L Ting254, A Javaid254, N Motherwell254, H Moore254, H Millward254, S Jose254, N Schunki254, A Noakes 254, C Clulow254 **- Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral, UK** G Sadera255, R Jacob255, C Jones255 **- The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, King’s Lynn, UK** M Blunt256, Z Coton256, H Curgenven256, S Mohamed Ally256, K Beaumont256, M Elsaadany256, K Fernandes256, I Ali Mohamed Ali256, H Rangarajan256, V Sarathy256, S Selvanayagam256, D Vedage256, M White256 **- Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital, Blackburn, UK** M Smith257, N Truman257, S Chukkambotla257, S Keith257, J Cockerill-Taylor257, J Ryan-Smith257, R Bolton257, P Springle257, J Dykes257, J Thomas257, M Khan257, M T Hijazi257, E Massey257, G Croston257 **- Poole Hospital, Poole, UK** H Reschreite r258, J Camsooksai258, S Patch258, S Jenkins258, C Humphrey258, B Wadams258, J Camsooksai258. **- Medway Maritime Hospital, Gillingham, UK** N Bhatia259, M Msiska259, O Adanini259. **- Warwick Hospital, Warwick, UK** B Attwood260, P Parsons260. **- The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK** K Tatham261, S Jhanji261, E Black261, A Dela Rosa 261, R Howle261, B Thomas261, T Bemand261, R Raobaikady261 **- The Princess Alexandra Hospital, Harlow, UK** R Saha262, N Staines262, A Daniel 262, J Finn262. **- Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK** J Hutter263, P Doble263, C Shovelton263, C Pawley263. **- George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust, Nuneaton, UK** T Kannan264, M Hill264. **- East Surrey Hospital, Redhill, UK** E Combes265, S Monnery265, T Joefield265. **- West Middlesex Hospital, Isleworth, UK** M Popescu266, M Thankachen266, M Oblak266. **- Warrington General Hospital, Warrington, UK** J Little267, S McIvor267, A Brady 267, H Whittle267, H Prady267, R Chan267 **- Southport and Formby District General Hospital, Ormskirk, UK** A Ahmed 268, A Morris 268. **- Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK** C Gibson269, E Gordon269, S Keenan269, H Quinn269, S Benyon269, S Marriott269, L Zitter269, L Park269, K Baines269 **- Macclesfield District General Hospital, Macclesfield, UK** M Lyons270, M Holland270, N Keenan270, M Young270. **- Borders General Hospital, Melrose, UK** S Garrioch271, J Dawson271, M Tolson271. **- Birmingham Children’s Hospital, Birmingham, UK** B Scholefield272, R Bi272. **- William Harvey Hospital, Ashford, UK** N Richardson273, N Schumacher273, T Cosier273, G Millen273 **- Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, UK** A Higham274, K Simpson274 **- Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital, Margate, UK** S Turki275, L Allen275, N Crisp275, T Hazleton275, A Knight275, J Deery275, C Price275, S Turney275, S Tilbey275, E Beranova275 **- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK** D Wright276, L Georg276, S Twiss276. **- Darlington Memorial Hospital, Darlington, UK** A Cowton277, S Wadd277, K Postlethwaite277. **- Southend University Hospital, Westcliff-on-Sea, UK** P Gondo278, B Masunda278, A Kayani 278, B Hadebe278 **- Raigmore Hospital, Inverness, UK** J Whiteside279, R Campbell279, N Clarke279 **- Salisbury District Hospital, Salisbury, UK** P Donnison280, F Trim280, I Leadbitter280 **- Peterborough City Hospital, Peterborough, UK** D Butcher281, S O’Sullivan281 **- Ipswich Hospital, Ipswich, UK** B Purewal282, S Bell282, V Rivers’282 **- Hereford County Hospital, Hereford, UK** R O’Leary283, J Birch283, E Collins283, S Anderson283, K Hammerton283, E Andrews283 **- Furness General Hospital, Barrow-in-Furness, UK** A Higham284, K Burns284 **- Forth Valley Royal Hospital, Falkirk, UK** I Edmond285, D Salutous285, A Todd 285, J Donnachie285, P Turner285, L Prentice285, L Symon285, N Runciman285, F Auld285 **- Torbay Hospital, Torquay, UK** M Halkes286, P Mercer286, L Thornton286 **- St Mary’s Hospital, Newport, UK** G Debreceni287, J Wilkins287, A Brown 287, V Crickmore287. **- Royal Manchester Children’s Hospital, Manchester, UK** G Subramanian288, R Marshall288, C Jennings288, M Latif288, L Bunni288 **- Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, UK** M Spivey289, S Bean289, K Burt289 **- Queen Elizabeth Hospital Gateshead, Gateshead, UK** V Linnett290, J Ritzema290, A Sanderson 290, W McCormick290, M Bokhari290 **- Kent & Canterbury Hospital, Canterbury, UK** R Kapoor291, D Loader291 **- James Paget University Hospital NHS Trust, Great Yarmouth, UK** A Ayers 292, W Harrison292, J North292 **- Darent Valley Hospital, Dartford, UK** Z Belagodu293, R Parasomthy293, O Olufuwa293, A Gherman 293, B Fuller293, C Stuart293 **- The Alexandra Hospital, Redditch and Worcester Royal Hospital, Worcester, UK** O Kelsall294, C Davis294, L Wild294, H Wood294, J Thrush294, A Durie294, K Austin’294, K Archer294, P Anderson294, C Vigurs294 **- Ysbyty Gwynedd, Bangor, UK** C Thorpe295, A Thomas 295, E Knights295, N Boyle295, A Price295 **- Yeovil Hospital, Yeovil, UK** A Kubisz-Pudelko296, D Wood296, A Lewis 296, S Board296, L Pippard296, J Perry296, K Beesley296 **- University Hospital Hairmyres, East Kilbride, UK** A Rattray297, M Taylor297, E Lee297, L Lennon297, K Douglas297, D Bell297, R Boyle297, L Glass297 **- Scunthorpe General Hospital, Scunthorpe, UK** M Nauman Akhtar298, K Dent298, D Potoczna298, S Pearson298, E Horsley298, S Spencer298 **- Princess Royal Hospital Brighton, West Sussex, UK** C Phillips299, D Mullan299, D Skinner299, J Gaylard299, L Ortiz-Ruizdegordoa299. **- Lincoln County Hospital, Lincoln, UK** R Barber300, C Hewitt300, A Hilldrith 300, S Shepardson300, M Wills300, K Jackson-Lawrence300 **- Homerton University Hospital, London, UK** A Gupta301, A Easthope 301, E Timlick301, C Gorman301. **- Glangwili General Hospital, Camarthen, UK** I Otaha302, A Gales 302, S Coetzee302, M Raj302, M Peiu302 **- Ealing Hospital, Southall, UK** V Parris303, S Quaid303, E Watson303 **- Scarborough General Hospital, Scarborough, UK** K Elliott304, J Mallinson304, B Chandler304, A Turnbull 304 **- Royal Albert Edward Infirmary, Wigan, UK** A Quinn305, C Finch305, C Holl305, J Cooper305, A Evans305. **- Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woolwich, London, UK** W Khaliq306, A Collins 306, E Treus Gude306 **- North Devon District Hospital, Barnstaple, UK** N Love307, L van Koutrik307, J Hunt307, D Kaye307, E Fisher307, A Brayne 307, V Tuckey307, P Jackson307, J Parkin307 **- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK** D Brealey308, E Raith308, A Tariq 308, H Houlden308, A Tucci308, J Hardy308, E Moncur308. **- Eastbourne District General Hospital, East Sussex, UK and Conquest Hospital, East Sussex, UK** J Highgate309, A Cowley 309 **- Diana Princess of Wales Hospital, Grimsby, UK** A Mitra310, R Stead310, T Behan310, C Burnett310, M Newton310, E Heeney310, R Pollard310, J Hatton310 **- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK** A Patel311, V Kasipandian311, S Allibone311, R M Genetu311 **- Prince Philip Hospital, Lianelli, UK** I Otahal312, L O’Brien312, Z Omar312, E Perkins312, K Davies312 **- Prince Charles Hospital, Merthyr Tydfil, UK** D Tetla313, C Pothecary313, B Deacon313 **- Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, UK** B Shelley314, V Irvine314 **- Dorset County Hospital, Dorchester, UK** S Williams315, P Williams315, J Birch315, J Goodsell315, R Tutton315, L Bough315, B Winter-Goodwin315 **- Calderdale Royal Hospital, Halifax, UK** R Kitson316, J Pinnell316, A Wilson316, T Nortcliffe316, T Wood316, M Home316, K Holdroyd316, M Robinson316, R Shaw316, J Greig316, M Brady316, A Haigh316, L Matupe316, M Usher316, S Mellor316, S Dale316, L Gledhill316, L Shaw316, G Turner316, D Kelly316, B Anwar316, H Riley316, H Sturgeon316, A Ali 316, L Thomis316, D Melia316, A Dance 316, K Hanson316 **- West Suffolk Hospital, Suffolk, UK** S Humphreys317, I Frost317, V Gopal317, J Godden317, A Holden317, S Swann317. **- West Cumberland Hospital, Whitehaven, UK** T Smith318, M Clapham318, U Poultney318, R Harper318, P Rice318. **- University Hospital Lewisham, London, UK** W Khaliq319, R Reece-Anthony319, B Gurung319. **- St John’s Hospital Livingston, Livingston, UK** S Moultrie320, M Odam320 **- Sheffield Children’s Hospital, Sheffield, UK** A Mayer321, A Bellini 321, A Pickard 321, J Bryant321, N Roe321, J Sowter321 **- Hinchingbrooke Hospital, Huntingdon, UK** D Butcher322, K Lang322, J Taylor322. **- Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK** P Barry323 **- Bronglais General Hospital, Aberystwyth, UK** M Hobrok324, H Tench324, R Wolf-Roberts324, H McGuinness324, R Loosley324 **- Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, Liverpool, UK** D Hawcutt325, L Rad325, L O’Malley325, P Saunderson325, G Seddon325, T Anderson 325, N Rogers325 **- University Hospital Monklands, Airdrie, UK** J Ruddy326, M Harkins326, M Taylor326, C Beith326, A McAlpine326, L Ferguson326, P Grant326, S MacFadyen326, M McLaughlin326, T Baird326, S Rundell326, L Glass326, B Welsh326, R Hamill326, F Fisher326. **- Cumberland Infirmary, Carlisle, UK** T Smith327, J Gregory327, A Brown 327 122) Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK 123) Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 124) UCL Centre for Human Health and Performance, London, W1T 7HA, UK 125) Department of Critical Care Medicine, Queen’s University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, ON, Canada 126) Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, China 127) Clinical Research Centre at St Vincent’s University Hospital, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland 128) Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK 129) William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK 130) NIHR Health Protection Research Unit for Emerging and Zoonotic Infections, Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 7BE, UK 131) Respiratory Medicine, Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, Institute in The Park, University of Liverpool, Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, Liverpool, UK 132) National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK 133) Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust: London, London, UK 134) Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Guy’s and St. Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK 135) MRC-University of Glasgow Centre for Virus Research, Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK 136) Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK 137) Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK 138) Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, London, UK 139) Edinburgh Clinical Research Facility, Western General Hospital, University of Edinburgh, EH4 2XU, UK 140) Genomics England, London, UK 141) Centre for Inflammation Research, The Queen’s Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, 47 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, UK 142) Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh, EH4 2XU, UK 143) Institute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia 144) Biostatistics Group, School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China 145) School of Life Sciences, Westlake University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310024, China 146) Westlake Laboratory of Life Sciences and Biomedicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310024, China 147) Centre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, Teviot Place, Edinburgh EH8 9AG, UK 148) Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden 149) Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK 150) Guys and St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK 151) James Cook University Hospital, Middlesburgh, UK 152) The Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK 153) King’s College Hospital, London, UK 154) Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK 155) John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK 156) Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, UK 157) Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK 158) Ashford and St Peter’s Hospital, Surrey, UK 159) Royal Stoke University Hospital, Staffordshire, UK 160) Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK 161) Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK 162) Kingston Hospital, Surrey, UK 163) The Tunbridge Wells Hospital and Maidstone Hospital, Kent, UK 164) North Middlesex University Hospital NHS trust, London, UK 165) Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford, UK 166) Blackpool Victoria Hospital, Blackpool, UK 167) Countess of Chester Hospital, Chester, UK 168) Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK 169) St George’s Hospital, London, UK 170) Good Hope Hospital, Birmingham, UK 171) Stepping Hill Hospital, Stockport, UK 172) Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK 173) Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley, UK 174) Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK 175) Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK 176) BHRUT (Barking Havering) - Queens Hospital and King George Hospital, Essex, UK 177) University College Hospital, London, UK 178) Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK 179) Western Sussex Hospitals, West Sussex, UK 180) Salford Royal Hospital, Manchester, UK 181) The Royal Oldham Hospital, Manchester, UK 182) Pinderfields General Hospital, Wakefield, UK 183) Basildon Hospital, Basildon, UK 184) University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK 185) Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK 186) Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK 187) Nottingham University Hospital, Nottingham, UK 188) Royal Hallamshire Hospital and Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK 189) Royal Hampshire County Hospital, Hampshire, UK 190) Queens Hospital Burton, Burton-On-Trent, UK 191) New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK 192) Heartlands Hospital, Birmingham, UK 193) Walsall Manor Hospital, Walsall, UK 194) Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Buckinghamshire, UK 195) Sandwell General Hospital, Birmingham, UK 196) Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, Berkshire, UK 197) Charing Cross Hospital, St Mary’s Hospital and Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK 198) Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary, Dumfries, UK 199) Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol, UK 200) Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK 201) Whiston Hospital, Prescot, UK 202) Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Cardiff, UK 203) King’s Mill Hospital, Nottingham, UK 204) Fairfield General Hospital, Bury, UK 205) Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK 206) Northwick Park Hospital, London, UK 207) Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK 208) Royal Derby Hospital, Derby, UK 209) Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, UK 210) Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK 211) Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK 212) Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, UK 213) Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy, UK 214) Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, UK 215) Barnsley Hospital, Barnsley, UK 216) York Hospital, York, UK 217) University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton on Tees, UK 218) University Hospital Wishaw, Wishaw, UK 219) Whittington Hospital, London, UK 220) Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK 221) The Royal Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, UK 222) Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, UK 223) Norfolk and Norwich University hospital (NNUH), Norwich, UK 224) Great Ormond St Hospital and UCL Great Ormond St Institute of Child Health NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK 225) Airedale General Hospital, Keighley, UK 226) Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK 227) Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK 228) Russell’s Hall Hospital, Dudley, UK 229) Rotherham General Hospital, Rotherham, UK 230) North Manchester General Hospital, Manchester, UK 231) Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital, Basingstoke, UK 232) Royal Free Hospital, London, UK 233) Hull Royal Infirmary, Hull, UK 234) Harefield Hospital, London, UK 235) Chesterfield Royal Hospital Foundation Trust, Chesterfield, UK 236) Barnet Hospital, London, UK 237) Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, UK 238) St James’s University Hospital and Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK 239) Glan Clwyd Hospital, Bodelwyddan, UK 240) University Hospital Crosshouse, Kilmarnock, UK 241) Royal Bolton Hospital, Bolton, UK 242) Princess of Wales Hospital, Llantrisant, UK 243) Pilgrim Hospital, Lincoln, UK 244) Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, North Shields, UK 245) Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, UK 246) Lister Hospital, Stevenage, UK 247) Bedford Hospital, Bedford, UK 248) Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK 249) Royal Bournemouth Hospital, Bournemouth, UK 250) The Great Western Hospital, Swindon, UK 251) Watford General Hospital, Watford, UK 252) University Hospital North Durham, Darlington, UK 253) Tameside General Hospital, Ashton Under Lyne, UK 254) Princess Royal Hospital Shrewsbury and Royal Shrewsbury Hospital, Shrewsbury, UK 255) Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral, UK 256) The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, King’s Lynn, UK 257) Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital, Blackburn, UK 258) Poole Hospital, Poole, UK 259) Medway Maritime Hospital, Gillingham, UK 260) Warwick Hospital, Warwick, UK 261) The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK 262) The Princess Alexandra Hospital, Harlow, UK 263) Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK 264) George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust, Nuneaton, UK 265) East Surrey Hospital, Redhill, UK 266) West Middlesex Hospital, Isleworth, UK 267) Warrington General Hospital, Warrington, UK 268) Southport and Formby District General Hospital, Ormskirk, UK 269) Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK 270) Macclesfield District General Hospital, Macclesfield, UK 271) Borders General Hospital, Melrose, UK 272) Birmingham Children’s Hospital, Birmingham, UK 273) William Harvey Hospital, Ashford, UK 274) Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, UK 275) Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital, Margate, UK 276) Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK 277) Darlington Memorial Hospital, Darlington, UK 278) Southend University Hospital, Westcliff-on-Sea, UK 279) Raigmore Hospital, Inverness, UK 280) Salisbury District Hospital, Salisbury, UK 281) Peterborough City Hospital, Peterborough, UK 282) Ipswich Hospital, Ipswich, UK 283) Hereford County Hospital, Worcester, UK 284) Furness General Hospital, Barrow-in-Furness, UK 285) Forth Valley Royal Hospital, Falkirk, UK 286) Torbay Hospital, Torquay, UK 287) St Mary’s Hospital, Newport, UK 288) Royal Manchester Children’s Hospital, Manchester, UK 289) Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, UK 290) Queen Elizabeth Hospital Gateshead, Gateshead, UK 291) Kent & Canterbury Hospital, Canterbury, UK 292) James Paget University Hospital NHS Trust, Great Yarmouth, UK 293) Darent Valley Hospital, Dartford, UK 294) The Alexandra Hospital, Redditch and Worcester Royal Hospital, Worcester, UK 295) Ysbyty Gwynedd, Bangor, UK 296) Yeovil Hospital, Yeovil, UK 297) University Hospital Hairmyres, East Kilbride, UK 298) Scunthorpe General Hospital, Scunthorpe, UK 299) Princess Royal Hospital Brighton, West Sussex, UK 300) Lincoln County Hospital, Lincoln, UK 301) Homerton University Hospital, London, UK 302) Glangwili General Hospital, Camarthen, UK 303) Ealing Hospital, Southall, UK 304) Scarborough General Hospital, Scarborough, UK 305) Royal Albert Edward Infirmary, Wigan, UK 306) Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woolwich, London, UK 307) North Devon District Hospital, Barnstaple, UK 308) National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK 309) Eastbourne District General Hospital, East Sussex, UK and Conquest Hospital, East Sussex, UK 310) Diana Princess of Wales Hospital, Grimsby, UK 311) The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK 312) Prince Philip Hospital, Lianelli, UK 313) Prince Charles Hospital, Merthyr Tydfil, UK 314) Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, UK 315) Dorset County Hospital, Dorchester, UK 316) Calderdale Royal Hospital, Halifax, UK 317) West Suffolk Hospital, Suffolk, UK 318) West Cumberland Hospital, Whitehaven, UK 319) University Hospital Lewisham, London, UK 320) St John’s Hospital Livingston, Livingston, UK 321) Sheffield Children’s Hospital, Sheffield, UK 322) Hinchingbrooke Hospital, Huntingdon, UK 323) Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK 324) Bronglais General Hospital, Aberystwyth, UK 325) Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, Liverpool, UK 326) University Hospital Monklands, Airdrie, UK 327) Cumberland Infirmary, Carlisle, UK **-German COVID-19 OMICS Initiative (DeCOI) - Host genetics subgroup** Axel Schmidt20, Kerstin U. Ludwig20, Selina Rolker20, Markus M. Nöthen20, Julia Fazaal20, Verena Keitel329, Björn Jensen328, Torsten Feldt328, Lisa Knopp328, Julia Schröder21, Carlo Maj329, Fabian Brand329, Marc M. Berger329, Thorsten Brenner330, Anke Hinney331, Oliver Witzke332, Robert Bals333, Christian Herr333, Nicole Ludwig334, Jörn Walter335, Jochen Schneider336, Johanna Erber336, Christoph D. Spinner336,337, Clemens M. Wendtner338, Christof Winter339, Ulrike Protzer340, Nicolas Casadei341, Stephan Ossowski342, Olaf H. Riess343, Eva C. Schulte21,22.23 328) Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Duesseldorf, Medical Faculty Heinrich Heine University, Duesseldorf, Germany 329) Institute of Genomic Statistics and Bioinformatics, University Hospital Bonn, Medical Faculty University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, Bonn Germany 330) Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany 331) Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany 332) Department of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany 333) Department of Internal Medicine V - Pneumology, Allergology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Saarland, Homburg/Saar, Germany 334) Center of Human and Molecular Biology, Department of Human Genetics, University Hospital Saarland, Homburg/Saar, Germany 335) Department of Genetics & Epigenetics, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany 336) Department of Internal Medicine II, School of Medicine, University Hospital Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. 337) German Center for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany. 338) Department of Hematology, Oncology, Immunology, Palliative Medicine, Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Munich Clinic Schwabing, Academic Teaching Hospital (LMU), Kölner Platz 1, 80804, Munich, Germany. 339) Institute of Clinical Chemistry and Pathobiochemistry, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. 340) Institute of Virology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich/Helmholtz Zentrum München, 81675 Munich, Germany; DZIF, partner sites Munich and Cologne/Bonn, Germany. 341) Institute of Medical Genetics and Applied Genomics, The University of Tübingen, Germany; NGS Competence Center Tübingen, The University of Tübingen, Germany. 342) Institute of Medical Genetics and Applied Genomics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 343) Institute of Medical Genetics and Applied Genomics, University of Tübingen, Calwerstrasse 7, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. **-Quebec COVID-19 Biobank (BQC-19)** J. Brent Richards12,14,15, Guillaume Butler-Laporte12,13 **-POLCOVID GEnomika** Mirosław Kwasniewski344, Urszula Korotko344, Karolina Chwialkowska344, Magdalena Niemira345, Jerzy Jaroszewicz346, Barbara Sobala-Szczygiel346, Beata Puzanowska347, Anna Parfieniuk-Kowerda348, Diana Martonik348, Anna Moniuszko-Malinowska349, Sławomir Pancewicz349, Dorota Zarębska-Michaluk350, Krzysztof Simon351,Monika Pazgan-Simon351, Iwona Mozer-Lisewska352, Maciej Bura352, Agnieszka Adamek352, Krzysztof Tomasiewicz353 Małgorzata Pawłowska354, Anna Piekarska355, Aleksandra Berkan-Kawinska355, Andrzej Horban356, Justyna Kowalska356, Regina Podlasin357, Piotr Wasilewski357, Arsalin Azzadin358, Miroslaw Czuczwar359, Slawomir Czaban360, Paweł Olszewski361, Jacek Bogocz361, Magdalena Ochab361, Anna Kruk361, Sandra Uszok361, Agnieszka Bielska361, Anna Szałkowska362, Justyna Raczkowska362, Gabriela Sokołowska362 Joanna Chorostowska-Wynimko363, Aleksandra Jezela-Stanek363, Adriana Roży363, Urszula Lechowicz363, Urszula Polowianiuk364, Kamil Grubczak365, Aleksandra Starosz365, Andrzej Eljaszewicz365, Wiktoria Izdebska365, Adam Krętowski367, Robert Flisiak368, Marcin Moniuszko369 344) Centre for Bioinformatics and Data Analysis, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland. 345) Clinical Research Centre, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland. 346) Department of Infectious Diseases in Bytom, Medical University of Silesia, Silesia, Poland 347) Department of Infectious Diseases, Megrez Hospital in Tychy, Tychy, Poland 348) Department of Infectious Diseases and Hepatology, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland 349) Department of Infectious Diseases and Neuroinfection, Medical University of Bialystok, Biastolyk, Poland 350) Department of Infectious Diseases, Jan Kochanowski University, Kielce, Poland 351) Department of Infectious Diseases and Hepatology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland 352) Department of Infectious Diseases and Hepatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland 353) Department of Infectious Diseases, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland 354) Department of Infectious Diseases and Hepatology, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland 355) Department of Infectious Diseases and Hepatology, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland 356) Department of Adult Infectious Diseases, Warsaw Medical University, Warsaw, Poland 357) IV-th Department, Hospital for Infectious Diseases, Poland 358) District Hospital in Bielsk Podlaski, Poland 359) Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Therapy, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland 360) Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Therapy, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland 361) IMAGENE.ME SA, Bialystok, Poland 362) Clinical Research Centre, Medical University of Bialystok, Biastolyk, Poland 363) Department of Genetics and Clinical Immunology, National Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases in Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland 364) District Sanitary Inspectorate in Bialystok, Biastolyk, Poland 365) Department of Regenerative Medicine and Immune Regulation, Medical University of Bialystok, Biastolyk, Poland 366) Department of Allergology and Internal Medicine, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland 367) Clinical Research Centre, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland 368) Department of Infectious Diseases and Hepatology, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland 369) Department of Allergology and Internal Medicine; Department of Regenerative Medicine and Immune Regulation, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland **- Saudi GENOME** Malak Abedalthagafi370, Manal Alaamery371,372,373, Salam Massadeh371,372,373, Mohamed Fawzy370, Hadeel AlBardis370, Nora Aljawini371,372, Moneera Alsuwailm371, Faisal Almalki371, Serghei Mangul374, Junghyun Jung374 370) Genomics Research Department, Saudi Human Genome Project, King Fahad Medical City and King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 371) Developmental Medicine Department, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs 372) KACST-BWH Centre of Excellence for Biomedicine, Joint Centers of Excellence Program, King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 373) King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST)-Saudi Human Genome Satellite Lab at Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs (MNGHA), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 374) Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.. **- QATAR GENOME** Hamdi Mbarek375, Chadi Saad375, Yaser Al-Sarraj375, Wadha Al-Muftah375, Radja Badji375, Asma Al Thani375, Said I. Ismail375 375) Qatar Genome Program, Qatar Foundation Research, Development and Innovation, Qatar Foundation, Doha, Qatar ## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study is part of the GEN-COVID Multicenter Study, [https://sites.google.com/dbm.unisi.it/gen-covid](https://sites.google.com/dbm.unisi.it/gen-covid), the Italian multicenter study aimed at identifying the COVID-19 host genetic bases. Specimens were provided by the COVID-19 Biobank of Siena, which is part of the Genetic Biobank of Siena, member of BBMRI-IT, of Telethon Network of Getic Biobanks (project no. GTB18001), of EuroBioBank and of D-Connect. We thank the CINECA consortium for providing computational resources and the Network for Italian Genomes (NIG) [http://www.nig.cineca.it](http://www.nig.cineca.it) for its support. We thank private donors for the support provided to A.R. (Department of Medical Biotechnologies, University of Siena) for the COVID-19 host genetics research project (D.L n.18 of March 17, 2020). We also thank the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative ([https://www.covid19hg.org/](https://www.covid19hg.org/)). We thank Uppsala Intensive Care COVID-19 research group; Tomas Luther, Anders Larsson, Katja Hanslin, Anna Gradin, Sarah Galien, Sara Bulow Anderberg, Jacob Rosén and Sten Rubertsson. We thank the patients and their loved ones who volunteered to contribute to this study at one of the most difficult times in their lives, and the research staff in every intensive care unit who recruited patients at personal risk during the most extreme conditions we have ever witnessed in UK hospitals. Whole-genome sequencing was done by Illumina in partnership with the University of Edinburgh and Genomics England and was funded by UK Department of Health and Social Care, UKRI and LifeArc. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the DHSC, DID, NIHR, MRC, Wellcome Trust or PHE. The Health Research Board of Ireland (Clinical Trial Network Award 2014-12) funds collection of samples in Ireland. This study owes a great deal to the National Institute of Healthcare Research Clinical Research Network (NIHR CRN) and the Chief Scientist Office (Scotland), who facilitate recruitment into research studies in NHS hospitals, and to the global ISARIC and InFACT consortia ## Footnotes * ╬ All co-authors and their affiliations appear at the end of this paper * ◊ All co-authors and their affiliations appear at the end of this paper * ❈ All co-authors and their affiliations appear at the end of this paper * * Co-first authors * ^ Co-last authors * $ Currently seconded at the ERCEA (European Research Council Executive Agency), Brussels, Belgium. The views expressed here are entirely those of the authors and may not be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. * Received September 3, 2021. * Revision received September 3, 2021. * Accepted September 14, 2021. * © 2021, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory The copyright holder for this pre-print is the author. All rights reserved. The material may not be redistributed, re-used or adapted without the author's permission. ## REFERENCES 1. 1.Livingston, E., Bucher, K. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Italy. JAMA. 323, 1335 (2020). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2020.4344&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 2. 2.Chen, N., et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet 395: 507–551 (2020). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 3. 3.Zhang, X. et al. Viral and host factors related to the clinical outcome of COVID-19. Nature. 583, 7816 (2020). [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 4. 4.Elhabyan, A. et al. The role of host genetics in susceptibility to severe viral infections in humans and insights into host genetics of severe COVID-19: A systematic review. Virus Res. 289, 198163 (2020). 5. 5.Islam, M.R. et al. Genome-wide analysis of SARS-CoV-2 virus strains circulating worldwide implicates heterogeneity. Sci Rep. 10(1), 14004 (2020). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41598-020-70812-6&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 6. 6.Li, X. et al. Clinical determinants of the severity of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 16**(**5):e0250602 (2020). 7. 7.Severe Covid-19 GWAS Group et al. Genomewide Association Study of Severe Covid-19 with Respiratory Failure. N Engl J Med. 383(16), 1522–1534 (2020). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/nejmoa2020283&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 8. 8.Pairo-Castineira E. et al. Genetic mechanisms of critical illness in COVID-19. Nature. 591(7848), 92–98 (2021). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41586-020-03065-y&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33307546&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 9. 9.COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative et al. Mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19. Published online ahead of print, 2021 Jul 8. Nature (2021). 10. 10.Zhang, Q. et al. Inborn errors of type I IFN immunity in patients with life-threatening COVID-19. Science (New York, N.Y.). 370(6515), eabd4570 (2020). 11. 11.Van der Made, C.I. et al. Presence of Genetic Variants Among Young Men With Severe COVID-19. JAMA, 324(7), 663–673 (2020). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2020.13719&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 12. 12.Fallerini, C. et al. Association of Toll-like receptor 7 variants with life-threatening COVID-19 disease in males: findings from a nested case-control study. eLife. 10, e67569 (2021). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7554/eLife.67569&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33650967&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 13. 13.Solanich, X. et al. Genetic screening for *TLR7* variants in young and previously healthy men with severe COVID-19: a case series. Front Immunol. 12, 719115 (2021). 14. 14.Williams, F. et al. Self-Reported Symptoms of COVID-19, Including Symptoms Most Predictive of SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Are Heritable. ISTS, 23(6), 316–321 (2020). 15. 15.Daga, S. et al. Employing a systematic approach to biobanking and analyzing clinical and genetic data for advancing COVID-19 research. Eur J Hum Genet. 29(5),745–759 (2021). 16. 16.Baldassarri, M. et al. Shorter androgen receptor polyQ alleles protect against life-threatening COVID-19 disease in European males. EBioMedicine, 65, 103246 (2021). 17. 17.Croci, S. et al. The polymorphism L412F in TLR3 inhibits autophagy and is a marker of severe COVID-19 in males. medRxiv 2021.03.23.21254158 (2021) and in press in Autophagy. 18. 18.Fallerini, C. et al. *SELP* Asp603Asn and severe thrombosis in COVID-19 males: implication for anti P-selectin monoclonal antibodies treatment. medRxiv 2021.05.25.21257803 (2021) and in press in Journal of Hematology & Oncology. 19. 19.Benetti, E. et al. Clinical and molecular characterization of COVID-19 hospitalized patients. PLoS one, 15(11), e0242534 (2020). 20. 20.Picchiotti, N. et al. Post-Mendelian genetic model in COVID-19. medRxiv 2021.01.27.21250593 (2021). 21. 21.Mars, N. et al. The role of polygenic risk and susceptibility genes in breast cancer over the course of life. Nat Commun. 14, 11(1):6383 (2020). 22. 22.COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative [https://www.covid19hg.org/](https://www.covid19hg.org/) (2021). 23. 23.COVID-19 Therapeutic Trial Synopsis. WHO R&D Blueprint Novel Coronavirus. Covid 19 Therapeutic Trial Synopsis. R&D Blueprint (2020). 24. 24.O’Connor, BD., Van Auwera, G. Genomics in the Cloud: Using Docker, Gatk, and WDL in Terra. O’Reilly Media (2020). 25. 25.Li, H., Durbin, R. Fast and accurate long-read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics. 26(5), 589–95 (2010). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/bioinformatics/btp698&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20080505&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000274973800001&link_type=ISI) 26. 26.Wang, K., Li, M., Hakonarson, H. ANNOVAR: functional annotation of genetic variants from high-throughput sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 38(16), e164 (2010). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/nar/gkq603&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20601685&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 27. 27.Purcell, S. et al. PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am J Hum Genet. 81(3), 559–75 (2007). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1086/519795&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17701901&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 28. 28.Subramanian, A. et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102(43),15545–15550 (2005). [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMjoiMTAyLzQzLzE1NTQ1IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMDkvMTQvMjAyMS4wOS4wMy4yMTI2MjYxMS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 29. 29.Mootha, V.K. et al. PGC-1alpha-responsive genes involved in oxidative phosphorylation are coordinately downregulated in human diabetes. Nat Genet 34(3), 267–273 (2003). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/ng1180&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12808457&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000183815300013&link_type=ISI) 30. 30.Reich, M. et al. GenePattern 2.0. Nat Genet 38, 500–501 (2006). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/ng0506-500&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16642009&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000237147500003&link_type=ISI) 31. 31.1. Cagney G., 2. Emili A. Merico, D., Isserlin, R., Bader, G.D. Visualizing Gene-Set Enrichment Results Using the Cytoscape Plug-in Enrichment Map. In: Cagney G., Emili A. (eds) Network Biology. Methods in Molecular Biology (Methods and Protocols)781. Humana Press. (2011). 32. 32.Shannon, P. et al. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome research, 13(11), 2498–2504 (2003). [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiZ2Vub21lIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiIxMy8xMS8yNDk4IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMDkvMTQvMjAyMS4wOS4wMy4yMTI2MjYxMS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 33. 33.Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nat Methods 17(3), 261–272 (2020). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32015543&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 34. 34.Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in python. J mach learn res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cpc.2010.04.018&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23755062&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 35. 35.Benetti E., Tita R., Spiga O. et al. ACE2 gene variants may underlie interindividual variability and susceptibility to COVID-19 in the Italian population. Eur J Hum Genet. 28(11):1602–1614 (2020). [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 36. 36.Darrah, R.J. et al. AGTR2 absence or antagonism prevents cystic fibrosis pulmonary manifestations. J.Cyst.Fibros. 18**(**1),127–134 (2019). 37. 37.Marouli, E. et al. Rare and low-frequency coding variants alter human adult height. Nature, 542(7640), 186–190 (2017). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nature21039&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28146470&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F09%2F14%2F2021.09.03.21262611.atom) 38. 38.International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium. Electronic address: chris.cotsapas{at}yale.edu, & International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium. Low-Frequency and Rare-Coding Variation Contributes to Multiple Sclerosis Risk. Cell, 175(6), 1679–1687.e7 (2018). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cell.2018.09.049&link_type=DOI) 39. 39.Covid19hg.org, June 14, 2021 meeting [https://www.covid19hg.org/blog/2021-06-17-june-14-2021-meeting/](https://www.covid19hg.org/blog/2021-06-17-june-14-2021-meeting/) (2021). 40. 40.Tan, Y. et al. Association of the OAS3 rs1859330 G/A genetic polymorphism with severity of enterovirus-71 infection in Chinese Han children. Arch Virol 162, 2305–2313 (2017). 41. 41.Subramanian, S. et al. A Tlr7 translocation accelerates systemic autoimmunity in murine lupus. PNAS 103(26), 9970–9975 (2006) [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMTAzLzI2Lzk5NzAiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMS8wOS8xNC8yMDIxLjA5LjAzLjIxMjYyNjExLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 42. 42.Bayati, A., Kumar, R., Francis, V., & McPherson, P. S. SARS-CoV-2 infects cells after viral entry via clathrin-mediated endocytosis. J. Biol. Chem 296, 100306 (2021). 43. 43.Reggiori, F. et al. Coronaviruses Hijack the LC3-I-Positive EDEMosomes, ER-Derived Vesicles Exporting Short-Lived ERAD Regulators, for Replication. Cell Host Microbe 7, 500–508 (2021). 44. 44.Baldassarri, M. et al. Severe COVID-19 in Hospitalized Carriers of Single *CFTR* Pathogenic Variants. J. pers. med. 11(6), 558. (2021). [1]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [2]: /embed/graphic-1.gif [3]: F2/embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [4]: F2/embed/inline-graphic-3.gif