The effect of circulating zinc, selenium, copper and vitamin K1 on COVID-19 outcomes: a Mendelian randomization study

Maria K. Sobczyk, Tom R. Gaunt
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.10.18.21265128

ABSTRACT

Background Previous results from observational, interventional studies and in vitro experiments suggest that certain micronutrients have anti-viral and immunomodulatory activities. In particular, it has been hypothesized that zinc, selenium, copper and vitamin K1 have strong potential for prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19.

Objectives We aimed to test whether genetically predicted Zn, Se, Cu or vitamin K1 levels have a causal effect on COVID-19 related outcomes: risk of infection, hospitalization and critical illness.

Methods We employed two-sample Mendelian Randomization (MR) analysis. Our genetic variants derived from European-ancestry GWAS reflected circulating levels of Zn, Cu, Se in red blood cells as well as Se and vitamin K1 in serum/plasma. For the COVID-19 outcome GWAS, we used infection, hospitalization or critical illness. Our inverse-variance weighted (IVW) MR analysis was complemented by sensitivity analyses: more liberal selection of variants at genome-wide subsignificant threshold, MR-Egger and weighted median/mode tests.

Results Circulating micronutrient levels show limited evidence of association with COVID-19 infection with odds ratio [OR] ranging from 0.97 (95% CI: 0.87-1.08, p-value=0.55) for zinc to 1.07 (95% CI: 1.00-1.14, p-value=0.06) – ie. no beneficial effect for copper, per 1 SD increase in exposure. Similarly minimal evidence was obtained for the hospitalization and critical illness outcomes with OR from 0.98 (95% CI: 0.87-1.09, p-value=0.66) for vitamin K1 to 1.07 (95% CI: 0.88-1.29, p-value=0.49) for copper, and from 0.93 (95% CI: 0.72-1.19, p-value=0.55) for vitamin K1 to 1.21 (95% CI: 0.79-1.86, p-value=0.39) for zinc, respectively.

Conclusions This study does not provide evidence that supplementation with zinc, selenium, copper or vitamin K1 can prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection, critical illness or hospitalization for COVID-19.

Introduction

Highly transmissible and virulent in at-risk groups, SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent for COVID-19, has been sweeping the globe since December 2019. However, despite intensive research, there are few effective prophylactic and early-stage therapeutic interventions for COVID-19, with the exception of vaccines(1,2). However, worldwide vaccine distribution remains highly inequitable, with less than 4% of the African population vaccinated as of September 2021(3).

Corollary to drug repurposing efforts, the potential role of micronutrient supplementation towards preventing and alleviating COVID-19 has been proposed(4,5). Supplements have some unique advantages as they are inexpensive, widely available over-the-counter, easily distributed and stored, generally well tolerated and well characterised in terms of safety. Amongst vitamins and minerals, good mechanistic reasons for more research exist for zinc, selenium, copper and vitamin K1, chiefly due to their important roles in immune and antiviral response(4).

Zinc (Zn) is an essential trace metal with structural roles in regulatory proteins, as enzyme cofactor, and as a signalling molecule. Of relevance to COVID-19, zinc deficiency can lead to dysfunctional immune response with reduced activity of innate immune cells(6,7), lymphopenia(8) and activation of NF-KB signalling inducing production of IL-6 and other cytokines involved in “cytokine storm”, characteristic of COVID-19(9–11). Furthermore, zinc has manifold antiviral properties in vitro and in vivo(12,13). With respect to SARS-CoV, Zn combined with a ionophore was shown to inhibit its RNA polymerase and block virus replication in cell culture(14). In SARS-CoV-2, Zn2+ inhibits the main protease (Mpro) which results in reduced viral replication in cell culture(15). Limited evidence from randomized trials on common cold suggests beneficial effect of zinc supplementation on cold duration and less conclusively, incidence and severity(16), while adjuvant treatment in severe paediatric pneumonia reduced hospital stay(17).

Selenium (Se) is a constituent of 25 selenoproteins with functions in redox homeostasis, endoplasmic reticulum stress and inflammatory response(18). Overall, Se can be a partial determinant of viral virulence(19). Sub-optimally low Se intake is combined with coxsackievirus infection in aetiology of Keshan disease(20). Furthermore, immunocompetence for infection clearance with other viral diseases is decreased in Se deficiency(21) and marginal Se status(22). In vitro, Se supplementation was shown to inhibit replication of porcine circovirus(23). Ebselen, a synthetic organoselenium compound, was found to be one of the most effective SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro) inhibitors by forming a selenyl sulphide bond with the protease’s catalytic dyad(24,25) which provides a potential mode of antiviral action for organic selenium molecules, similarly to ionic zinc. In addition, ebselen is functionally related to glutathione peroxidase 1, a major selenoenzyme which has been also found to physically interact with Mpro(26). Other mechanisms through which Se could help in COVID-19 management is through control of ROS-driven endothelial damage(18), reduced IL-6 pathway response(27–29) and stimulation of innate immune system(30,31).

Copper (Cu) is indispensable for the processes of respiration, free radical defence and immune regulation due to its structural role in cuproenzymes(32,33). Similar to Zn, Cu plays an essential part in antioxidant response activated during inflammation. Copper deficiency can result in neutropenia and immunosuppression via reduced T-cell proliferation(34). Inactivation of viruses, including SARS-CoV-2(35) on copper surfaces is widely exploited in clinical practice(36), but Cu2+ was also reported to decrease infectivity of HIV(37), influenza(38) virus and SARS-CoV-2(39) in mammalian cells. Copper can also exert antiviral properties potentially by stimulating autophagy(40).

Two vitamers of vitamin K exist: K1 (phylloquinone) and K2 (menaquinone)(41). Vitamin K is necessary for activation of pro- and anti-clotting factors in the liver and peripheral tissues, respectively. Moreover, vitamin K activates Matrix Gla protein (MGP) which inhibits elastic fibre degradation and vascular mineralisation. Extrahepatic vitamin K deficiency and low MGP activity have been found in hospitalised COVID-19 patients(42,43). According to Janssen et al (2021)(44), this could result from increased degradation of elastic fibres by SARS-CoV-2 promoting lung fibrosis and concomitant with predicted depletion of endothelial vitamin K-dependent anti-coagulant (protein S) lead to coagulopathy. Therefore, vitamin K could provide adjunct therapy of thrombosis events which are characteristic of severe COVID-19(45).

In the absence of well-powered randomized control trials (RCT) testing the prophylactic and therapeutic potential of these micronutrients, we decided to carry out a Mendelian Randomization (MR) assessment of their potential causal effects. MR is an established causal inference method which uses genetic variants as instrumental variables(46).

Since genetic variants are independently and randomly distributed at meiosis and established at conception, the risk of confounding and reverse causation is greatly reduced in MR (46). This is especially important as any observational studies linking nutrients levels to COVID-19 outcomes will be confounded by fact that COVID-19 at-risk groups (e.g. the elderly, high BMI individuals, diabetics(47)) have on average lower/suboptimal levels of many micronutrients(8,10,13,42,44,48–50) and at the same time suffer from poorer COVID-19 outcomes. MR analyses can help to clarify the causal pathway in such cases. As such, MR has been successfully applied in nutritional epidemiology(51), including in studies using our micronutrients of interest as exposure(52–58).

Methods

Selection of genetic instruments – relevance MR criterion

GWAS studies

We searched the literature, OpenGWAS(59) and GWAS Catalog(60) for genetic instruments associated with zinc, copper, selenium and vitamin K1 levels in populations of European ancestry.

We evaluated genetic instruments from the published GWAS of zinc, copper and selenium content of erythrocytes in the Queensland Institute of Medical Research (QIMR) twin cohort and whole blood selenium in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) cohort of pregnant women (61) measured using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Red blood concentrations of those trace elements generally represent overall nutritional status well(62) and total blood measurement is a standard biomarker(63). GWAS was adjusted for the following covariates: analysis batch, haemoglobin concentration and analytical QC data.

For selenium instruments, we used a published fixed-effects meta-analysis of toe-nail selenium concentration measured using neutron activation analysis in four European-ancestry US cohorts (Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults, Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project, Nurses’ Health Study, Health Professionals Follow-up Study) co-analysed with the QIMR & ALSPAC GWAS results(64). Toe-nail Se GWAS was adjusted for the following covariates: age, smoking status, geography and top eigenvectors. Compared to circulating selenium, toe-nail content reflects more long-term Se exposure.

Vitamin K instruments were derived from a GWAS of phylloquinone (vitamin K1), the primary circulating form of vitamin K, which measurements were available in 2 European ancestry CHARGE cohorts(65): Framingham Offspring Consortium and the Health, Aging and Body Composition study. Phylloquinone measurements were taken in plasma/serum using reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography followed by fluorometric detection. Vitamin K1 concentration in plasma reflects recent intake(42). The GWAS included the following covariates: age, sex and study-specific stratification.

For each micronutrient phenotype, we clumped the instruments using PLINK ver. v1.90b4.1(66) and 1000 Genomes European reference panel(67), at the threshold of r2 < 0.05 and clumping distance of 10 Mbp. The final set of instruments was derived by combining 1 representative SNP from each clump selected based on lowest p-value and presence in the outcome dataset.

Zinc genetic instruments

One of the two instruments for zinc was missing (rs1532423), however we found a good proxy for it using 1000 Genomes European population using the LDproxy web app(68): rs2453868, situated 34,383 bp away with r2 of 0.93 and D’ of 1 (correlated alleles: rs1532423A= rs2453868C, rs1532423G= rs2453868T). Altogether, rs2120019 and rs1532423 account for 4.6% of variance in red blood cell copper concentration (Supplementary Table 1).

Selenium genetic instruments

Out of 12 genome-wide significant SNPs found at 2 loci in the meta-analysis, 4 SNPs survived LD-pruning. However, only 2 variants could be used as instruments (rs921943, rs6859667) as SNPs in the other 2 clumps (rs6586282, rs1789953, rs234709) or their proxies were not available in the COVID-19 GWAS. The 2 instruments in the meta-analysis accounted for only 2.25% of variance in the trait (Supplementary Table 1). The results of the meta-analysis were initially presented as Z-scores which we converted to betas using the formula in Taylor et al. (2016)(69).

Copper genetic instruments

Two genome-wide significant instruments were identified: rs1175550 and rs2769264; altogether they account for 4.6% of variance in red blood cell copper concentration (Supplementary Table 1).

Vitamin K1 genetic instruments

11 signals at 6 loci were detected in the GWAS discovery stage at p-value < 5 × 10−5, with none of the SNPs reaching genome-wide significance. We found four SNPs of concern which were removed from downstream processing (Supplementary Methods). The three variants retained: rs4645543, rs4852146, rs6862071 (Supplementary Table 1) jointly explained 3.06% of variance in circulating phylloquinone concentration.

Sensitivity analyses using subsignificant hits

In addition to the main analysis where we included only genome-wide significant hits at p-value 5 × 10−8 (with the exception of vitamin K1, where no variants crossed the threshold), we ran sensitivity analyses including variants selected at a more liberal, subsignificant threshold of 5 × 10−5. This allowed us to increase statistical power of analysis at the increased risk of violation of core MR assumptions. For zinc (Supplementary Table 2), we used 12 SNPs (total R2 of 14%), while for selenium we only had access to results from individual cohorts: QIMR (15 SNPs, R2 = 13.26%) and ALSPAC (12 SNPs, R2 = 10.93%) and for copper we arrived at 7 SNPs (R2 = 10.03%).

Independence MR criterion

We calculated the variance in each exposure explained by each set of instruments (R2) and F-statistics using the formulas in Yarmolinsky et al. (2018)(55). We did not see any weak instrument bias, with F-statistic ranging from 15 to 172 (Supplementary Table 1 and 2).

Exclusion restriction MR criterion

PhenoScanner V2(70) was used to assess presence of horizontal pleiotropy among the candidate variants using default settings (Supplementary Table 3 and 4, Supplementary Methods).

In addition, we carried out leave-one-out analysis in our sensitivity checks which should minimize any possible confounding introduced by individual SNPs associated with height and RBC traits, whenever possible. Next, we calculated Cochran’s Q statistic and I2 to look for signs of heterogeneity, also indicative of pleiotropy. Finally, MR-Egger is one of the MR methods which we employed and which can detect directional horizontal pleiotropy if the intercept significantly deviates from 0(71).

Selection of outcomes

The biggest publicly available GWAS to date on COVID-19 from the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative release 5 was chosen(72). This fixed-effect meta-analysis contains up to 49,562 COVID-19 patients and 2 million controls from 46 studies across 19 countries, however, we used results obtained in 35 European-only cohorts. The outcomes available were very severe (critical) COVID-19 (vs population), hospitalized (vs SARS-CoV-2 infected but non-hospitalized with COVID-19 or vs population) and SARS-CoV-2 infection (vs population) (Supplementary Table 5). The covariates used in the GWAS analysis were age and sex.

Statistical analysis

We used the online mRnd power calculator to explore the limits of our MR analysis(73). All the MR analyses were done using TwoSampleMR(74) and MendelianRandomization(75) R packages. Our main method was the inverse variance weighted (IVW) random-effects meta-analysis of causal effects of individual instruments as it is the most efficient, however IVW is biased in cases of unbalanced pleiotropy(76). We complemented IVW with analyses using other MR methods: MR-Egger(71), weighted median-based and mode-based estimator. MR-Egger relaxes the assumption of balanced horizontal pleiotropy at the cost of reduced power, whereas weighted median estimator is still valid if only at least 50% of variants meet the three main MR assumptions(46); mode-based estimator is similarly robust to outliers while being more conservative.

Ethics

This study uses publicly available summary data and no original data collection was undertaken for this manuscript. Evidence of ethical approval for all of the included GWAS studies can be found in the previous publications. Our investigation is in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki.

Results

Power analysis

In the main analysis, SARS-CoV-2 infection was the outcome with the biggest power due to highest number of cases and controls in the outcome GWAS. Minimum detectable one-tailed odds ratio (OR) at 80% power ranged from 0.91 for selenium to 0.93 for zinc and copper (Supplementary Table 6). COVID-19 hospitalization analysis possessed lower power ranging from OR of 0.82 for Se to 0.87 for Zn and Cu. Poor power was found for very severe COVID-19 (OR of 0.75 for Se to 0.81 for Zn and Cu). In order to increase power in our sensitivity analyses, we used sets of genome-wide subsignificant (max p-value of 5 × 10−5) variants for zinc, selenium and copper (Supplementary Table 7). In the subsignificant instrument analyses, minimum detectable one-tailed odds ratios at 80% power were 0.95-0.96 for SARS-CoV-2 infection and 0.87-0.89 for very severe (critical) COVID-19.

Mendelian Randomization

Zinc

We found little evidence of genetically-predicted circulating zinc concentration having a large effect on COVID-19 outcomes (Table 1, Figure 1). IVW odds ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infection were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.87-1.08, nominal p-value=0.55) in the main analysis and 1.01 (95% CI: 0.98-1.05, nominal p-value=0.49) in the sensitivity subsignificant (max p-value of 5 × 10−5) analysis, per 1 SD increase of circulating zinc. Hospitalization (ver. population) showed weak evidence of association with zinc levels (OR=1.06, 95% CI: 0.81-1.39, p-value=0.66) in the main analysis and subsignificant analysis (OR=0.98, 95% CI: 0.91-1.06, p-value=0.62). Similar results were obtained for the hospitalized (ver. non-hospitalized) outcome (Figure 1). Lastly, we did not find any strong effect of zinc on very severe disease in the main analysis (OR=1.21, 95% CI: 0.79-1.86, p-value=0.39). A narrower but overlapping estimate was derived from the more liberal set of SNPs (OR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.81-1.04, p-value=0.16). Estimates in the sensitivity analyses using MR-Egger, median-weighted and mode-weighted estimator directionally matched the results from IVW (Figure 1, Supplementary Table 8).

View this table:
Table 1

Results of MR analysis studying the effect of circulating zinc (Zn), selenium (Se), copper (Cu) and vitamin K1 concentration on 3 COVID-19 outcomes. Inverse-variance weighted (IVW)-based odds ratios, their p-values along with Cochrane’s Q statistic and MR-Egger intercept are presented. We used two sets of instruments whenever possible: Zn/Se/Cu refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−8 and Zn/Se/Cu/vit. K1 subsignificant refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−5.

Figure 1
Figure 1

MR estimates for the effect of circulating zinc (Zn) on three COVID-19 outcomes obtained using 4 different statistical methods. We used two sets of zinc instruments: Zn refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−8 and subsignificant Zn refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−5.

Selenium

We found weak causal effect of meta-analysed selenium levels (per 1 SD increment) on SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 hospitalization and critical illness (Table 1, Figure 2). IVW odds ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection using the instruments in the GWAS meta-analysis of Se blood and toe-nail levels was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.95-1.11, nominal p-value=0.5), while in the ALSPAC and QIMR subsignificant (max p-value of 5 × 10−5) sensitivity analyses we found narrower CI intervals also overlapping 1: OR=0.99 (95% CI: 0.95-1.03, p-value=0.70) and 1.00 (0.97-1.03, p-value=0.97), accordingly. Similar results were found moving onto protection against hospitalization (ver. population) using the main (OR=0.98; 95% CI: 0.87-1.10, p-value=0.71), ALSPAC (OR=1.03, 95% CI: 0.95-1.12, p-value=0.45) and QIMR (OR=1.06, 95% CI: 1.00-1.12, p-value=0.03) subsignificant sets of instruments. The nominally significant increased risk of hospitalization with COVID-19 in the QIMR cohort did not survive multiple-correction testing. Similar estimates were found in the hospitalized COVID-19 (ver non-hospitalized) comparison, however for that outcome the point-estimate ORs were < 1 in the QIMR cohort using the sensitivity methods: MR-Egger, weighted median and mode (Figure 2, Supplementary Table 8). Finally, increased genetically predicted selenium levels did not causally associate with COVID-19 severity using the meta-analysis (OR=0.99, 95% CI: 0.83-1.17, p-value=0.86), ALSPAC (OR=1.06; 95% CI: 0.94-1.19, p-value=0.37) or QIMR (OR=1.07; 95% CI: 0.99-1.16, p-value=0.07) subsignificant instruments.

Figure 2
Figure 2

MR estimates for the effect of circulating selenium (Se) on three COVID-19 outcomes obtained using 4 different statistical methods. We used three sets of selenium instruments: Se refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−8 and subsignificant Se refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−5 in the ALSPAC and QIMR cohorts.

Copper

Limited evidence for predicted increase in the risk of SARS-Cov-2 infection per 1 SD increment in circulating copper levels (IVW OR=1.07, 95% CI: 1.00-1.14, nominal p-value=0.06) was attenuated (Table 1, Figure 3) using the sensitivity subsignificant (max p- value of 5 × 10−5) instrument set (OR= 1.01; 95% CI: 0.96-1.07, p-value=0.66). For the two other outcomes, we found non-significant > 1 OR point estimates in the main analysis (OR= 1.07, 95% CI: 0.88-1.29, p-value=0.49 for hospitalized ver. population and OR= 1.13; 95% CI: 0.82-1.55, p-value=0.47 for very severe COVID-19) which were flipped < 1 in the subsignificant instrument analysis (OR= 0.99, 95% CI: 0.91-1.08, p-value=0.82 and OR= 0.94, 95% CI: 0.83-1.07, p-value=0.33 respectively) using IVW method as well as MR-Egger and weighted median (Figure 3, Supplementary Table 8).

Figure 3
Figure 3

MR estimates for the effect of circulating copper (Cu) on three COVID-19 outcomes obtained using 4 different statistical methods. We used two sets of copper instruments: Cu refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−8 and subsignificant Cu refers to instruments with p-values < 5 × 10−5.

Vitamin K1

Using a limited set of 3 vitamin K1 genome-wide subsignificant (max p-value of 5 × 10−5) instruments, we were not able to detect any strong effect of genetically-predicted circulating vitamin K1 on COVID-19 outcomes (Table 1, Figure 4). In the IVW analysis, vitamin K1 increment (per natural log transformed nmol/L) associated with OR of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.93-1.05, p-value=0.68) for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Next, both hospitalization (ver. population) and very severe COVID-19 showed lower OR on increased vitamin K1 exposure (OR=0.98, 95% CI: 0.87-1.09, p-value=0.66 and OR=0.93, 95% CI: 0.72-1.19, p-value=0.55, respectively) but the CI comfortably overlapped OR either side of 1. The confidence intervals for our sensitivity methods (MR-Egger, weighted median and mode) overlapped the IVW CI, although OR point estimates sometimes differed in terms of direction of effect.

Figure 4
Figure 4

MR estimates for the effect of circulating vitamin K1 on three COVID-19 outcomes obtained using 4 different statistical methods. We only had access to instruments with subsignificant p-values < 5 × 10.

Pleiotropic bias

We detected no significant heterogeneity of effect between our variants using Cochrane’s Q and pleiotropy using MR-Egger intercept in the zinc, selenium and copper MR analysis (Table 1). However, for vitamin K1 we did find directional pleiotropy using MR-Egger, with the intercept differing significantly from 0. Therefore, causal estimates using this set of instruments are biased and need to be interpreted cautiously.

Discussion

Our analyses attempted to elucidate the potential of zinc, selenium, copper and vitamin K1 in prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 using MR techniques. However, we found little evidence of causal association of genetically predicted micronutrient concentration on COVID-19 outcomes.

Zinc’s many antiviral, immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory functions have generated a lot of interest for its potential use in COVID-19 management(8,13,49,50,77). Consequently, over 50 RCTs including zinc, albeit typically used as adjuvant treatment or prophylactic, have commenced (ClinicalTrials.Gov, September 2021). One of the first to publish results, The COVID A to Z trial, which tested the direct effect of high-dose zinc supplementation, found no reduction in symptom duration in outpatients and was terminated early(78). In terms of prophylaxis, no beneficial effect of zinc supplementation was reported among 370 000 British users of COVID-19 Symptom Study app(79). However, small observational studies reported lower serum Zn levels as a predictor of illness severity(80–83). As a caveat, all the real life data and MR analyses do not include application of ionophores which may be necessary for zinc’s antiviral inhibition(14,15).

Moreover, a number of observational studies established correlation between low serum selenium levels and COVID-19 severity and mortality(81,84–86). An ecological study found a significant positive association between hair selenium concentration and COVID-19 recovery rate in different provinces of China(87) which was subsequently replicated using local soil selenium concentrations as the predictor variable(88).

In general, one way to partially reconcile our findings for selenium and zinc with general micronutrient deficit in hospitalized or severely ill COVID-19 patients found in small studies comes from previous observations in critically ill individuals. There, the initial hypozincemia and hyposelenemia is thought to stem from disease-driven inflammatory process (acute phase response), is found chiefly in plasma (but not e.g. erythrocytes)(13,89,90) and recovers over time in survivors. However, this does not mean that pre-existing deficiencies will not have a compounded negative impact at this stage(50).

A recently published study suggested that Cu status is correlated with survival status of COVID-19 patients(32). In contrast, another study from Skalny et al.(86) reported that plasma copper levels and Cu/Zn ratio increased in more severe disease. This could reflect the fact that copper and zinc are antagonistically absorbed(91) and high serum Cu/Zn ratio is a marker for infection, as zinc gets redistributed to liver in the acute phase of the infection(92).

Despite evidence of the role of coagulation modulation by vitamin K in COVID-19 severity and poorer outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients with lower vitamin K status(42,43), we did not detect any effect of circulating phylloquinone on very severe COVID-19 or other outcomes.

We carried out multiple sensitivity analyses, involving different methods (e.g. MR-Egger) and instrument selection, which revealed consistent results. In general, inclusion of pleiotropic variants in MR is likely to skew the results away from the null, so it is reassuring that we find no effects also in the analyses involving variants selected at a more liberal subsignificant p-value threshold(76) and in vitamin K1 analyses showing directional pleiotropic bias.

MR studies have confirmed RCT findings for many known risk factors, such as blood pressure and low-density lipoproteins(93). MR has also indicated no causal effect of high-density lipoproteins and C-reactive protein(94,95) on cardiovascular disease, which, had it been reported earlier, could have saved a lot of effort and expense developing failed drugs. MR evidence can therefore deliver considerable insight about the prospect of a therapeutic. Here, current MR analyses do not support causal pathway between Zn, Se, Cu, vitamin K1 blood levels and COVID-19 outcomes.

Thanks to MR framework’s use of genetic instrumental variables, the possibility of confounding and reverse causality was limited. Lately, some concern regarding the ubiquity of collider bias in epidemiological investigations of COVID-19 was voiced(96). However, the use of general population control without known COVID-19 infection in the outcome GWAS serves to decrease the likelihood of collider bias emerging, while not biasing effect size estimates in GWAS sensitivity analyses. We also included a hospitalized versus non-hospitalized GWAS outcome but even in these analyses at a higher risk of collider bias, the results broadly agreed with those from hospitalized versus population outcome. However, ascertainment bias in the GWAS due to differential case reporting and SARS-CoV-2 exposure levels by e.g. socio-economic status remains difficult to account for.

Another potential form of bias affecting MR is population stratification. Since we included only European-ancestry samples in all our analyses, we limit the potential of this bias to skew the results. However, there are no strong biological reasons why our conclusions should not be generalizable to other ancestries.

The main limitation of our study is relatively low power to detect modest effects of micronutrient levels on COVID-19 hospitalization and severity due to few reliable genetic instruments available for micronutrients of interest and limited number of cases in the COVID-19 GWAS. This could be improved in the future as better-powered GWAS for both the exposures (particularly for vitamin K, where no instruments reached genome-wide significance) and outcome become available. Since we used the same GWAS for instrument discovery and effect estimate, our analysis is likely to suffer from “winners’ curse” and increased weak instrument bias that would pull the results towards the null(76), which again could be rectified if new micronutrient GWAS are released.

Another limitation is that MR methods used only model linear effects within normal range of micronutrient concentration, so any potential non-linear U/J-shaped, threshold effects will not be correctly estimated. Individual-level data for both exposure and outcome in the same population sample are required for such an analysis(76). MR also cannot answer the question if specific subgroups, such as micronutrient deficient individuals can benefit from supplementation. Furthermore, phenotypes used in MR analysis typically correspond to lifelong exposure and small changes in micronutrient concentration, which does not exactly mirror intensive, high-dose clinical interventions.

In conclusion, we found little evidence of an effect of genetically predicted zinc, selenium, copper or vitamin K1 levels towards preventing infection with SARS-CoV-2, and disease progression: hospitalization or developing very severe COVID-19. Similar MR findings were obtained for two other promising micronutrients: vitamin C(97) and vitamin D(98,99), suggesting that utility of dietary supplementation for general population in the COVID-19 pandemic may be limited.

Data Availability

All exposure data described in the article is provided in the supplementary tables. All outcome data is available from COVID-19 HGI website: https://www.covid19hg.org/results/r5/ Code for statistical analyses is available on: https://github.com/marynias/covid19

Statement of authors’ contributions to manuscript

MKS and TRG designed research, MKS analyzed data, MKS and TRG wrote the paper, MKS had primary responsibility for final content. All authors have read and approved the manuscript.

Sources of support for the work

The supporting source had no involvement in drafting or restrictions regarding publication.

Conflict of interest and funding disclosure

This research was funded by the UK Medical Research Council (mc_uu_00011/4) and carried out in the MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit. TRG receives funding from Biogen for unrelated research.

Online Supporting Material

Supplementary Methods

Supplementary Tables 1-8

Data sharing

All exposure data described in the article is provided in the supplementary tables. All outcome data is available from COVID-19 HGI website: https://www.covid19hg.org/results/r5/. Code for statistical analyses is available on: https://github.com/marynias/covid19

Acknowledgements

List of abbreviations

GWAS
Genome wide association study
MR
Mendelian Randomization
RCT
Randomized control trial

References

  1. 1.↵
    Siemieniuk RAC, Bartoszko JJ, Ge L, Zeraatkar D, Izcovich A, Kum E, Pardo-Hernandez H, Qasim A, Martinez JPD, Rochwerg B, et al. Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ [Internet]. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; 2020;370. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2980
  2. 2.↵
    Bartoszko JJ, Siemieniuk RAC, Kum E, Qasim A, Zeraatkar D, Ge L, Han MA, Sadeghirad B, Agarwal A, Agoritsas T, et al. Prophylaxis against covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ [Internet]. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; 2021;373. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n949
  3. 3.↵
    WHO Africa. Africa faces 470 million COVID-19 vaccine shortfall in 2021 [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Sep 16]. Available from: https://www.afro.who.int/news/africa-faces-470-million-covid-19-vaccine-shortfall-2021
  4. 4.↵
    Akhtar S, Das JK, Ismail T, Wahid M, Saeed W, Bhutta ZA. Nutritional perspectives for the prevention and mitigation of COVID-19. Nutr Rev [Internet]. 2020;79:289–300. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuaa063
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    Shakoor H, Feehan J, Al Dhaheri AS, Ali HI, Platat C, Ismail LC, Apostolopoulos V, Stojanovska L. Immune-boosting role of vitamins D, C, E, zinc, selenium and omega-3 fatty acids: Could they help against COVID-19? Maturitas [Internet]. 2021;143:1–9. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378512220303467
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    Keen CL, Gershwin ME. Zinc deficiency and immune function. Annu Rev Nutr. United States; 1990;10:415–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    Dardenne M. Zinc and immune function. Eur J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2002;56:S20–3. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601479
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    Joachimiak MP. Zinc against COVID-19? Symptom surveillance and deficiency risk groups. PLoS Negl Trop Dis [Internet]. Public Library of Science; 2021;15:1–17. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008895
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    Copaescu A, Smibert O, Gibson A, Phillips EJ, Trubiano JA. The role of IL-6 and other mediators in the cytokine storm associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020;146:518-534.e1.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.
    Mayor-Ibarguren A, Busca-Arenzana C, Robles-Marhuenda Á. A Hypothesis for the Possible Role of Zinc in the Immunological Pathways Related to COVID-19 Infection. Front Immunol [Internet]. 2020;11:1736. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01736
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    Liu J, Li S, Liu J, Liang B, Wang X, Wang H, Li W, Tong Q, Yi J, Zhao L, et al. Longitudinal characteristics of lymphocyte responses and cytokine profiles in the peripheral blood of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. EBioMedicine [Internet]. 2020;55:102763. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352396420301389
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    Read SA, Obeid S, Ahlenstiel C, Ahlenstiel G. The Role of Zinc in Antiviral Immunity. Adv Nutr [Internet]. 2019;10:696–710. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/advances/nmz013
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    Chinni V, El-Khoury J, Perera M, Bellomo R, Jones D, Bolton D, Ischia J, Patel O. Zinc supplementation as an adjunct therapy for COVID-19: Challenges and opportunities. Br J Clin Pharmacol [Internet]. n/a. Available from: https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bcp.14826
  14. 14.↵
    te Velthuis AJW, van den Worm SHE, Sims AC, Baric RS, Snijder EJ, van Hemert MJ. Zn2+ Inhibits Coronavirus and Arterivirus RNA Polymerase Activity In Vitro and Zinc Ionophores Block the Replication of These Viruses in Cell Culture. PLOS Pathog [Internet]. Public Library of Science; 2010;6:1–10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1001176
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    Panchariya L, Khan WA, Kuila S, Sonkar K, Sahoo S, Ghoshal A, Kumar A, Verma DK, Hasan A, Das S, et al. Zinc2+ ion inhibits SARS-CoV-2 main protease and viral replication in vitro. Chem Commun [Internet]. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; 2021;Epub ahead. Available from: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/13/2021.06.15.448551
  16. 16.↵
    Singh M, Das RR. Zinc for the common cold. Cochrane database Syst Rev. England; 2013;CD001364.
  17. 17.↵
    Brooks WA, Yunus M, Santosham M, Wahed MA, Nahar K, Yeasmin S, Black RE. Zinc for severe pneumonia in very young children: double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Lancet [Internet]. Elsevier; 2004;363:1683–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16252-1
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    Bermano G, Méplan C, Mercer DK, Hesketh JE. Selenium and viral infection: are there lessons for COVID-19? Br J Nutr. Cambridge University Press; 2021;125:618–627.
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.↵
    Manzanares W, Moreira E, Hardy G. Pharmaconutrition revisited for critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Does selenium have a place? Nutrition [Internet]. 2021;81:110989. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900720302720
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    Loscalzo J. Keshan Disease, Selenium Deficiency, and the Selenoproteome. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2014;370:1756–60. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcibr1402199
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    Rayman MP. The argument for increasing selenium intake. Proc Nutr Soc. Cambridge University Press; 2002;61:203–215.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. 22.↵
    Broome CS, McArdle F, Kyle JAM, Andrews F, Lowe NM, Hart CA, Arthur JR, Jackson MJ. An increase in selenium intake improves immune function and poliovirus handling in adults with marginal selenium status. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2004;80:154–62. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/80.1.154
    OpenUrl
  23. 23.↵
    Chen X, Ren F, Hesketh J, Shi X, Li J, Gan F, Huang K. Selenium blocks porcine circovirus type 2 replication promotion induced by oxidative stress by improving GPx1 expression. Free Radic Biol Med [Internet]. 2012;53:395–405. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891584912002481
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    Amporndanai K, Meng X, Shang W, Jin Z, Rogers M, Zhao Y, Rao Z, Liu Z-J, Yang H, Zhang L, et al. Inhibition mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 main protease by ebselen and its derivatives. Nat Commun [Internet]. 2021;12:3061. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23313-7
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    Jin Z, Du X, Xu Y, Deng Y, Liu M, Zhao Y, Zhang B, Li X, Zhang L, Peng C, et al. Structure of Mpro from SARS-CoV-2 and discovery of its inhibitors. Nature [Internet]. 2020;582:289–93. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2223-y
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    Seale LA, Torres DJ, Berry MJ, Pitts MW. A role for selenium-dependent GPX1 in SARS-CoV-2 virulence. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2020;112:447–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqaa177
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    Tsuji PA, Carlson BA, Anderson CB, Seifried HE, Hatfield DL, Howard MT. Dietary Selenium Levels Affect Selenoprotein Expression and Support the Interferon-γ and IL-6 Immune Response Pathways in Mice. Nutrients [Internet]. 2015;7:6529–49. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/7/8/5297
    OpenUrl
  28. 28.
    Walston J, Xue Q, Semba RD, Ferrucci L, Cappola AR, Ricks M, Guralnik J, Fried LP. Serum Antioxidants, Inflammation, and Total Mortality in Older Women. Am J Epidemiol [Internet]. 2005;163:18–26. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwj007
    OpenUrl
  29. 29.↵
    Kim IY, Stadtman TC. Inhibition of NF-kappaB DNA binding and nitric oxide induction in human T cells and lung adenocarcinoma cells by selenite treatment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94:12904–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    Kiremidjian-Schumacher L, Roy M, Wishe HI, Cohen MW, Stotzky G. Supplementation with selenium and human immune cell functions. Biol Trace Elem Res [Internet]. 1994;41:115. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02917222
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    Ravaglia G, Forti P, Maioli F, Bastagli L, Facchini A, Mariani E, Savarino L, Sassi S, Cucinotta D, Lenaz G. Effect of micronutrient status on natural killer cell immune function in healthy free-living subjects aged ≥90 y. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2000;71:590–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/71.2.590
    OpenUrl
  32. 32.↵
    Hackler J, Heller RA, Sun Q, Schwarzer M, Diegmann J, Bachmann M, Moghaddam A, Schomburg L. Relation of Serum Copper Status to Survival in COVID-19. Nutrients [Internet]. 2021;13. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/6/1898
  33. 33.↵
    Fooladi S, Matin S, Mahmoodpoor A. Copper as a potential adjunct therapy for critically ill COVID-19 patients. Clin Nutr ESPEN [Internet]. 2020;40:90–1. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405457720302096
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    Percival SS. Copper and immunity. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 1998;67:1064S–1068S. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/67.5.1064S
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    van Doremalen N, Bushmaker T, Morris DH, Holbrook MG, Gamble A, Williamson BN, Tamin A, Harcourt JL, Thornburg NJ, Gerber SI, et al. Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1. N Engl J Med [Internet]. Massachusetts Medical Society; 2020;382:1564–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2004973
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.↵
    Imani SM, Ladouceur L, Marshall T, Maclachlan R, Soleymani L, Didar TF. Antimicrobial Nanomaterials and Coatings: Current Mechanisms and Future Perspectives to Control the Spread of Viruses Including SARS-CoV-2. ACS Nano [Internet]. American Chemical Society; 2020;14:12341–69. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c05937
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    Sagripanti J-L, Lightfoote MM. Cupric and Ferric Ions Inactivate HIV. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses [Internet]. 1996;12:333–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1089/aid.1996.12.333
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    Horie M, Ogawa H, Yoshida Y, Yamada K, Hara A, Ozawa K, Matsuda S, Mizota C, Tani M, Yamamoto Y, et al. Inactivation and morphological changes of avian influenza virus by copper ions. Arch Virol. Austria; 2008;153:1467–72.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    Rodriguez K, Saunier F, Rigaill J, Audoux E, Botelho-Nevers E, Prier A, Dickerscheit Y, Pillet S, Pozzetto B, Bourlet T, et al. Evaluation of in vitro activity of copper gluconate against SARS-CoV-2 using confocal microscopy-based high content screening. J Trace Elem Med Biol [Internet]. 2021;68:126818. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X21001085
    OpenUrl
  40. 40.↵
    Tsang T, Posimo JM, Gudiel AA, Cicchini M, Feldser DM, Brady DC. Copper is an essential regulator of the autophagic kinases ULK1/2 to drive lung adenocarcinoma. Nat Cell Biol [Internet]. 2020;22:412–24. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-020-0481-4
    OpenUrl
  41. 41.↵
    Kudelko M, Yip TF, Hei Law GC, Lee SMY. Potential Beneficial Effects of Vitamin K in SARS-CoV-2 Induced Vascular Disease? Immuno [Internet]. 2021;1:17–29. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5601/1/1/3
    OpenUrl
  42. 42.↵
    Linneberg A, Kampmann FB, Israelsen SB, Andersen LR, Jørgensen HL, Sandholt H, Jørgensen NR, Thysen SM, Benfield T. The Association of Low Vitamin K Status with Mortality in a Cohort of 138 Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19. Nutrients [Internet]. 2021;13. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/6/1985
  43. 43.↵
    Dofferhoff ASM, Piscaer I, Schurgers LJ, Visser MPJ, van den Ouweland JMW, de Jong PA, Gosens R, Hackeng TM, van Daal H, Lux P, et al. Reduced vitamin K status as a potentially modifiable risk factor of severe COVID-19. Clin Infect Dis an Off Publ Infect Dis Soc Am. 2020;
  44. 44.↵
    Janssen R, Visser MPJ, Dofferhoff ASM, Vermeer C, Janssens W, Walk J. Vitamin K metabolism as the potential missing link between lung damage and thromboembolism in Coronavirus disease 2019. Br J Nutr. Cambridge University Press; 2021;126:191–198.
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.↵
    Klok FA, Kruip MJHA, van der Meer NJM, Arbous MS, Gommers DAMPJ, Kant KM, Kaptein FHJ, van Paassen J, Stals MAM, Huisman M V, et al. Incidence of thrombotic complications in critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. Thromb Res [Internet]. 2020;191:145–7. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049384820301201
    OpenUrl
  46. 46.↵
    Haycock PC, Burgess S, Wade KH, Bowden J, Relton C, Davey Smith G. Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: the design, analysis, and interpretation of Mendelian randomization studies. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2016;103:965–78. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.115.118216
    OpenUrl
  47. 47.↵
    Williamson EJ, Walker AJ, Bhaskaran K, Bacon S, Bates C, Morton CE, Curtis HJ, Mehrkar A, Evans D, Inglesby P, et al. Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY. Nature [Internet]. 2020;584:430–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2521-4
    OpenUrl
  48. 48.
    Robberecht H, De Bruyne T, Davioud-Charvet E, Mackrill J, Hermans N. Selenium Status in Elderly People: Longevity and Age-Related Diseases. Curr Pharm Des. United Arab Emirates; 2019;25:1694–706.
    OpenUrl
  49. 49.↵
    Mossink JP. Zinc as nutritional intervention and prevention measure for COVID-19 disease. BMJ Nutr Prev Heal. 2020;3:111–7.
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    Wessels I, Rolles B, Rink L. The Potential Impact of Zinc Supplementation on COVID-19 Pathogenesis. Front Immunol [Internet]. 2020;11:1712. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01712
    OpenUrl
  51. 51.↵
    Larsson SC. Mendelian randomization as a tool for causal inference in human nutrition and metabolism. Curr Opin Lipidol [Internet]. 2021;32. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/co-lipidology/Fulltext/2021/02000/Mendelian_randomization_as_a_tool_for_causal.2.aspx
  52. 52.↵
    Kodali HP, Pavilonis BT, Schooling CM. Effects of copper and zinc on ischemic heart disease and myocardial infarction: a Mendelian randomization study. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2018;108:237–42. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqy129
    OpenUrl
  53. 53.
    Zhou J, Liu C, Sun Y, Francis M, Ryu MS, Grider A, Ye K. Genetically predicted circulating levels of copper and zinc are associated with osteoarthritis but not with rheumatoid arthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil [Internet]. 2021;29:1029–35. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1063458421006208
    OpenUrl
  54. 54.
    Tsilidis KK, Papadimitriou N, Dimou N, Gill D, Lewis SJ, Martin RM, Murphy N, Markozannes G, Zuber V, Cross AJ, et al. Genetically predicted circulating concentrations of micronutrients and risk of colorectal cancer among individuals of European descent: a Mendelian randomization study. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2021;113:1490–502. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqab003
    OpenUrl
  55. 55.↵
    Yarmolinsky J, Bonilla C, Haycock PC, Langdon RJQ, Lotta LA, Langenberg C, Relton CL, Lewis SJ, Evans DM, Consortium P, et al. Circulating Selenium and Prostate Cancer Risk: A Mendelian Randomization Analysis. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst [Internet]. 2018;110:1035–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djy081
    OpenUrl
  56. 56.
    Zwakenberg SR, Remmelzwaal S, Beulens JWJ, Booth SL, Burgess S, Dashti HS, Imamura F, Feskens EJM, van der Schouw YT, Sluijs I. Circulating Phylloquinone Concentrations and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: A Mendelian Randomization Study. Diabetes [Internet]. American Diabetes Association; 2019;68:220–5. Available from: https://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/68/1/220
    OpenUrl
  57. 57.
    Larsson SC, Traylor M, Markus HS. Circulating Vitamin K1 Levels in Relation to Ischemic Stroke and Its Subtypes: A Mendelian Randomization Study. Nutrients [Internet]. 2018;10. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/10/11/1575
  58. 58.↵
    Lin S, Yang H. Ovarian cancer risk according to circulating zinc and copper concentrations: A meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization study. Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2021;40:2464–8. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561420305392
    OpenUrl
  59. 59.↵
    Elsworth B, Lyon M, Alexander T, Liu Y, Matthews P, Hallett J, Bates P, Palmer T, Haberland V, Smith GD, et al. The MRC IEU OpenGWAS data infrastructure. bioRxiv [Internet]. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; 2020; Available from: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/10/2020.08.10.244293
  60. 60.↵
    Milano A, McMahon A, Welter D, Bowler E, Hastings E, Cunningham F, MacArthur J, Morales J, Gil L, Cerezo M, et al. The new NHGRI-EBI Catalog of published genome-wide association studies (GWAS Catalog). Nucleic Acids Res [Internet]. 2016;45:D896–901. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw1133
    OpenUrl
  61. 61.↵
    Evans DM, Zhu G, Dy V, Heath AC, Madden PAF, Kemp JP, McMahon G, St Pourcain B, Timpson NJ, Golding J, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies loci affecting blood copper, selenium and zinc. Hum Mol Genet. 2013;22:3998–4006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  62. 62.↵
    Vitoux D, Arnaud J, Chappuis P. Are Copper, Zinc and Selenium in Erythrocytes Valuable Biological Indexes of Nutrition and Pathologylll? J Trace Elem Med Biol [Internet]. 1999;13:113–28. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X99800017
    OpenUrl
  63. 63.↵
    F. Combs Jr.. G. Biomarkers of Selenium Status. Nutrients [Internet]. 2015;7:2209–36. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/7/4/2209
    OpenUrl
  64. 64.↵
    Cornelis MC, Fornage M, Foy M, Xun P, Gladyshev VN, Morris S, Chasman DI, Hu FB, Rimm EB, Kraft P, et al. Genome-wide association study of selenium concentrations. Hum Mol Genet [Internet]. 2014;24:1469–77. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddu546
    OpenUrl
  65. 65.↵
    Dashti HS, Shea MK, Smith CE, Tanaka T, Hruby A, Richardson K, Wang TJ, Nalls MA, Guo X, Liu Y, et al. Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for circulating phylloquinone concentrations. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014;100:1462–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  66. 66.↵
    Chang CC, Chow CC, Tellier LCAM, Vattikuti S, Purcell SM, Lee JJ. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience [Internet]. 2015;4. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13742-015-0047-8
  67. 67.↵
    Auton A, Abecasis GR, Altshuler DM, Durbin RM, Bentley DR, Chakravarti A, Clark AG, Donnelly P, Eichler EE, Flicek P, et al. A global reference for human genetic variation. Nature. 2015;526:68–74.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  68. 68.↵
    Machiela MJ, Chanock SJ. LDlink: A web-based application for exploring population-specific haplotype structure and linking correlated alleles of possible functional variants. Bioinformatics. 2015;31:3555–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. 69.↵
    Taylor AE, Burgess S, Ware JJ, Gage SH, Richards JB, Davey Smith G, Munafò MR. Investigating causality in the association between 25(OH)D and schizophrenia. Sci Rep [Internet]. 2016;6:26496. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep26496
    OpenUrl
  70. 70.↵
    Kamat MA, Blackshaw JA, Young R, Surendran P, Burgess S, Danesh J, Butterworth AS, Staley JR. PhenoScanner V2: an expanded tool for searching human genotype–phenotype associations. Bioinformatics [Internet]. 2019;35:4851–3. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btz469
    OpenUrl
  71. 71.↵
    Bowden J, Davey Smith G, Burgess S. Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression. Int J Epidemiol [Internet]. 2015;44:512–25. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyv080
    OpenUrl
  72. 72.↵
    Initiative C-19 HG. Mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19. Nature [Internet]. 2021; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03767-x
  73. 73.↵
    Brion M-JA, Shakhbazov K, Visscher PM. Calculating statistical power in Mendelian randomization studies. Int J Epidemiol [Internet]. 2012;42:1497–501. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyt179
    OpenUrl
  74. 74.↵
    1. Loos R
    Hemani G, Zheng J, Elsworth B, Wade KH, Haberland V, Baird D, Laurin C, Burgess S, Bowden J, Langdon R, et al. The MR-Base platform supports systematic causal inference across the human phenome. Loos R, editor. Elife [Internet]. eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd; 2018;7:e34408. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.34408
    OpenUrl
  75. 75.↵
    Yavorska OO, Burgess S. MendelianRandomization: an R package for performing Mendelian randomization analyses using summarized data. Int J Epidemiol [Internet]. 2017;46:1734–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyx034
    OpenUrl
  76. 76.↵
    Burgess S, Davey Smith G, Davies NM, Dudbridge F, Gill D, Glymour MM, Hartwig FP, Holmes M V, Minelli C, Relton CL, et al. Guidelines for performing Mendelian randomization investigations. Wellcome open Res. 2019;4:186.
    OpenUrl
  77. 77.↵
    Marreiro D do N, Cruz KJC, Oliveira ARS de, Morais JBS, Freitas B de J e S de A, Melo SR de S, dos Santos LR, Cardoso BEP, Dias TM da S. Antiviral and immunological activity of zinc and possible role in COVID-19. Br J Nutr [Internet]. 2021/06/15. Cambridge University Press; 2021;1–8. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/article/antiviral-and-immunological-activity-of-zinc-and-possible-role-in-covid19/21DD0E9EDABC96DC94715DB30BAB11DE
  78. 78.↵
    Thomas S, Patel D, Bittel B, Wolski K, Wang Q, Kumar A, Il’Giovine ZJ, Mehra R, McWilliams C, Nissen SE, et al. Effect of High-Dose Zinc and Ascorbic Acid Supplementation vs Usual Care on Symptom Length and Reduction Among Ambulatory Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection: The COVID A to Z Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open [Internet]. 2021;4:e210369–e210369. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.0369
    OpenUrl
  79. 79.↵
    Louca P, Murray B, Klaser K, Graham MS, Mazidi M, Leeming ER, Thompson E, Bowyer R, Drew DA, Nguyen LH, et al. Modest effects of dietary supplements during the COVID-19 pandemic: insights from 445 850 users of the COVID-19 Symptom Study app. BMJ Nutr Prev Heal. 2021;4:149–57.
    OpenUrl
  80. 80.↵
    Yasui Y, Yasui H, Suzuki K, Saitou T, Yamamoto Y, Ishizaka T, Nishida K, Yoshihara S, Gohma I, Ogawa Y. Analysis of the predictive factors for a critical illness of COVID-19 during treatment - relationship between serum zinc level and critical illness of COVID-19 -. Int J Infect Dis [Internet]. 2020;100:230–6. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971220307232
    OpenUrl
  81. 81.↵
    Heller RA, Sun Q, Hackler J, Seelig J, Seibert L, Cherkezov A, Minich WB, Seemann P, Diegmann J, Pilz M, et al. Prediction of survival odds in COVID-19 by zinc, age and selenoprotein P as composite biomarker. Redox Biol [Internet]. 2021;38:101764. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213231720309691
    OpenUrl
  82. 82.
    Jothimani D, Kailasam E, Danielraj S, Nallathambi B, Ramachandran H, Sekar P, Manoharan S, Ramani V, Narasimhan G, Kaliamoorthy I, et al. COVID-19: Poor outcomes in patients with zinc deficiency. Int J Infect Dis [Internet]. 2020;100:343–9. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S120197122030730X
    OpenUrl
  83. 83.↵
    Vogel-González M, Talló-Parra M, Herrera-Fernández V, Pérez-Vilaró G, Chillón M, Nogués X, Gómez-Zorrilla S, López-Montesinos I, Arnau-Barrés I, Sorli-Redó ML, et al. Low Zinc Levels at Admission Associates with Poor Clinical Outcomes in SARS-CoV-2 Infection. Nutrients [Internet]. 2021;13. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/2/562
  84. 84.↵
    Majeed M, Nagabhushanam K, Gowda S, Mundkur L. An exploratory study of selenium status in healthy individuals and in patients with COVID-19 in a south Indian population: The case for adequate selenium status. Nutrition [Internet]. 2021;82:111053. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900720303361
    OpenUrl
  85. 85.
    Moghaddam A, Heller RA, Sun Q, Seelig J, Cherkezov A, Seibert L, Hackler J, Seemann P, Diegmann J, Pilz M, et al. Selenium Deficiency Is Associated with Mortality Risk from COVID-19. Nutrients [Internet]. 2020;12. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/7/2098
  86. 86.↵
    Skalny A V, Timashev PS, Aschner M, Aaseth J, Chernova LN, Belyaev VE, Grabeklis AR, Notova S V, Lobinski R, Tsatsakis A, et al. Serum Zinc, Copper, and Other Biometals Are Associated with COVID-19 Severity Markers. Metabolites [Internet]. 2021;11. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1989/11/4/244
  87. 87.↵
    Zhang J, Taylor EW, Bennett K, Saad R, Rayman MP. Association between regional selenium status and reported outcome of COVID-19 cases in China. Am J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2020;111:1297–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqaa095
    OpenUrl
  88. 88.↵
    Zhang H-Y, Zhang A-R, Lu Q-B, Zhang X-A, Zhang Z-J, Guan X-G, Che T-L, Yang Y, Li H, Liu W, et al. Association between fatality rate of COVID-19 and selenium deficiency in China. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2021;21:452. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-021-06167-8
    OpenUrl
  89. 89.↵
    Stefanowicz F, Gashut RA, Talwar D, Duncan A, Beulshausen JF, McMillan DC, Kinsella J. Assessment of plasma and red cell trace element concentrations, disease severity, and outcome in patients with critical illness. J Crit Care [Internet]. 2014;29:214–8. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944113003924
    OpenUrl
  90. 90.↵
    Nichol C, Herdman J, Sattar N, O’Dwyer PJ, O’Reilly DSJ, Littlejohn D, Fell G. Changes in the Concentrations of Plasma Selenium and Selenoproteins after Minor Elective Surgery: Further Evidence for a Negative Acute Phase Response? Clin Chem [Internet]. 1998;44:1764–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/44.8.1764
    OpenUrl
  91. 91.↵
    Oestreicher P, Cousins RJ. Copper and Zinc Absorption in the Rat: Mechanism of Mutual Antagonism. J Nutr [Internet]. 1985;115:159–66. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/115.2.159
    OpenUrl
  92. 92.↵
    Stafford SL, Bokil NJ, Achard MES, Kapetanovic R, Schembri MA, McEwan AG, Sweet MJ. Metal ions in macrophage antimicrobial pathways: emerging roles for zinc and copper. Biosci Rep [Internet]. 2013;33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1042/BSR20130014
  93. 93.↵
    Burgess S, Malarstig A. Using Mendelian randomization to assess and develop clinical interventions: limitations and benefits. J Comp Eff Res [Internet]. 2013;2:209–12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2217/cer.13.14
    OpenUrl
  94. 94.↵
    Voight BF, Peloso GM, Orho-Melander M, Frikke-Schmidt R, Barbalic M, Jensen MK, Hindy G, Hólm H, Ding EL, Johnson T, et al. Plasma HDL cholesterol and risk of myocardial infarction: a mendelian randomisation study. Lancet [Internet]. 2012;380:572–80. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673612603122
    OpenUrl
  95. 95.↵
    Association between C reactive protein and coronary heart disease: mendelian randomisation analysis based on individual participant data. BMJ [Internet]. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; 2011;342. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d548
  96. 96.↵
    Griffith GJ, Morris TT, Tudball MJ, Herbert A, Mancano G, Pike L, Sharp GC, Sterne J, Palmer TM, Davey Smith G, et al. Collider bias undermines our understanding of COVID-19 disease risk and severity. Nat Commun [Internet]. 2020;11:5749. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19478-2
    OpenUrl
  97. 97.↵
    Hui LL, Nelson EAS, Lin SL, Zhao J V. The role of vitamin C in pneumonia and COVID-19 infection in adults with European ancestry: a Mendelian randomisation study. Eur J Clin Nutr [Internet]. 2021; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-021-00993-4
  98. 98.↵
    Butler-Laporte G, Nakanishi T, Mooser V, Morrison DR, Abdullah T, Adeleye O, Mamlouk N, Kimchi N, Afrasiabi Z, Rezk N, et al. Vitamin D and COVID-19 susceptibility and severity in the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative: A Mendelian randomization study. PLOS Med [Internet]. Public Library of Science; 2021;18:1–14. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003605
    OpenUrl
  99. 99.↵
    Amin HA, Drenos F. No evidence that vitamin D is able to prevent or affect the severity of COVID-19 in individuals with European ancestry: a Mendelian randomisation study of open data. BMJ Nutr Prev & Heal [Internet]. BMJ Specialist Journals; 2021;4:42–8. Available from: https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/4/1/42
    OpenUrl
Back to top
Posted October 19, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email
The effect of circulating zinc, selenium, copper and vitamin K1 on COVID-19 outcomes: a Mendelian randomization study
Maria K. Sobczyk, Tom R. Gaunt
medRxiv 2021.10.18.21265128; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.10.18.21265128
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area