Evidence Hub

Genetic biomarkers associated with risk and therapeutic response in erectile dysfunction: a systematic review

Ferezin LP, Kayzuka C, Paiva de Alcântara E Silva M, Tavares Peixeiro CN, Rondon-Pereira VC, Tanus-Santos JE, Lacchini R

Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026

2 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a multifactorial condition influenced by vascular, neuroendocrine, metabolic, and psychological factors. Growing evidence suggests that genetic variation may contribute to individual susceptibility, severity, and therapeutic response, particularly regarding nitric oxide (NO) signaling and vascular pathways. To systematically synthesize evidence on genetic biomarkers associated with the risk, severity, or therapeutic response of ED in adult men.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251144891). Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, LILACS, and Web of Science. Observational studies evaluating genetic polymorphisms or related biomarkers in adult men with Erectile dysfunction were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality using JBI tools and the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

Results: Thirty-five studies met inclusion criteria. The genetic markers most frequently investigated involved pathways related to nitric oxide synthesis and endothelial function, including NOS3 (eNOS), NOS1, PDE5A, VEGF, ACE, ARG1/ARG2, DDAH1/2, and MTHFR. Functional variants-particularly NOS3 G894T, T-786C, and the intron 4 VNTR-were commonly associated with increased ED susceptibility, earlier onset, or greater severity, though results varied across populations. Several polymorphisms influenced…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free