Prognostic models in COVID-19 infection that predict severity: a systematic review

ACCREDIT: Validation of clinical score for progression of COVID-19 while hospitalized

COVID-19 is no longer a global health emergency, but it remains challenging to predict its prognosis.

Objective

To develop and validate an instrument to predict COVID-19 progression for critically ill hospitalized patients in a Brazilian population.

Methodology

Observational study with retrospective follow-up. Participants were consecutively enrolled for treatment in non-critical units between January 1, 2021, to February 28, 2022. They were included if they were adults, with a positive RT-PCR result, history of exposure, or clinical or radiological image findings compatible with COVID-19. The outcome was characterized as either transfer to critical care or death. Predictors such as demographic, clinical, comorbidities, laboratory, and imaging data were collected at hospitalization. A logistic model with lasso or elastic net regularization, a random forest classification model, and a random forest regression model were developed and validated to estimate the risk of disease progression.

Results

Out of 301 individuals, the outcome was 41.8 %. The majority of the patients in the study lacked a COVID-19 vaccination. Diabetes mellitus and systemic arterial hypertension were the most common comorbidities. After model development and cross-validation, the Random Forest regression was considered the best approach, and the following eight predictors were retained: D-dimer, Urea, Charlson comorbidity index, pulse oximetry, respiratory frequency, Lactic Dehydrogenase, RDW, and Radiologic RALE score. The model's bias-corrected intercept and slope were - 0.0004 and 1.079 respectively, the average prediction error was 0.028. The ROC AUC curve was 0.795, and the variance explained was 0.289.

Conclusion

The prognostic model was considered good enough to be recommended for clinical use in patients during hospitalization (https://pedrobrasil.shinyapps.io/INDWELL/). The clinical benefit and the performance in different scenarios are yet to be known.

Minimalistic Transcriptomic Signatures Permit Accurate Early Prediction of COVID-19 Mortality

Background

Predicting mortality risk in patients with COVID-19 remains challenging, and accurate prognostic assays represent a persistent unmet clinical need. We aimed to identify and validate parsimonious transcriptomic signatures that accurately predict fatal outcomes within 48 hours of hospitalization.

Methods

We studied 894 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 across 20 US hospitals and enrolled in the prospective Immunophenotyping Assessment in a COVID-19 Cohort (IMPACC) with peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and nasal swabs collected within 48 hours of admission. Host gene expression was assessed by RNA sequencing, nasal SARS-CoV-2 viral load was measured by RT-qPCR, and mortality was assessed at 28 days. We first defined transcriptional signatures and biological features of fatal COVID-19, which we compared against mortality signatures from an independent cohort of patients with non-COVID-19 sepsis (n=122). Using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression in 70% of the COVID-19 cohort, we trained parsimonious prognostic classifiers incorporating host gene expression, age, and viral load. The performance of single and three-gene classifiers was then determined in the remaining 30% of the cohort and subsequently externally validated in an independent, contemporary COVID-19 cohort (n=137) with vaccinated patients.

Results

Fatal COVID-19 was characterized by 4189 differentially expressed genes in the peripheral blood, representing marked upregulation of neutrophil degranulation, erythrocyte gas exchange, and heme biosynthesis pathways, juxtaposed against downregulation of adaptive immune pathways. Only 7.6% of mortality-associated genes overlapped between COVID-19 and sepsis due to other causes. A COVID-specific three-gene peripheral blood classifier (CD83, ATP1B2, DAAM2) combined with age and SARS-CoV-2 viral load achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.82-0.94). A three-gene nasal classifier (SLC5A5, CD200R1, FCER1A), in comparison, yielded an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.64-0.83). Notably the expression of OLAH alone, a gene recently implicated in severe viral infection pathogenesis, yielded an AUC of 0.86 (0.79-0.93). Both peripheral blood classifiers demonstrated comparable performance in vaccinated patients from an independent external validation cohort (AUCs 0.74-0.80).

Conclusions

A three-gene peripheral blood signature, as well as OLAH alone, accurately predict COVID-19 mortality early in hospitalization, including in vaccinated patients. These parsimonious blood- and nasal-based classifiers merit further study as accessible prognostic tools to guide triage, resource allocation, and early therapeutic interventions in COVID-19.

A meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of artificial intelligence predicting emergency department dispositions

BACKGROUND

The rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has led to its widespread application across various domains, showing encouraging outcomes. Many studies have utilized AI to forecast emergency department (ED) disposition, aiming to forecast patient outcomes earlier and to allocate resources better; however, a dearth of comprehensive review literature exists to assess the objective performance standards of these predictive models using quantitative evaluations. This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of AI in predicting ED disposition, encompassing admission, critical care, and mortality.

METHODS

Multiple databases, including Scopus, Springer, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Wiley, Sage, and Google Scholar, were searched until December 31, 2023, to gather relevant literature. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) were calculated to evaluate AI's predictive performance. Sub-group analyses were performed to explore covariates affecting AI predictive model performance.

RESULTS

The study included 88 articles possessed with 117 AI models, among which 39, 45, and 33 models predicted admission, critical care, and mortality, respectively. The reported statistics for sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC represent pooled summary measures derived from the component studies included in this meta-analysis. AI's summary sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC for predicting admission were 0.81 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.74-0.86), 0.87 (95% CI 0.81-0.91), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.93), respectively. For critical care, the values were 0.86 (95% CI 0.79-0.91), 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.93), and 0.93 (95% CI 0.89-0.95), respectively, and for mortality, they were 0.85 (95% CI 0.80-0.89), 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.96), and 0.93 (95% CI 0.89-0.96), respectively. Emergent sample characteristics and AI techniques showed evidence of significant covariates influencing the heterogeneity of AI predictive models for ED disposition.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis indicates promising performance of AI in predicting ED disposition, with certain potential for improvement, especially in sensitivity. Future research could explore advanced AI techniques such as ensemble learning and cross-validation with hyper-parameter tuning to enhance predictive model efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This systematic review was not registered with PROSPERO or any other similar registry because the review was completed prior to the opportunity for registration, and PROSPERO currently does not accept registrations for reviews that are already completed. We are committed to transparency and have adhered to best practices in systematic review methodology throughout this study.

A Machine Learning Model for Predicting Intensive Care Unit Admission in Inpatients with COVID-19 Using Clinical Data and Laboratory Biomarkers

Background: Artificial intelligence tools can help improve the clinical management of patients with severe COVID-19. The aim of this study was to validate a machine learning model to predict admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in individuals with COVID-19. Methods: A total of 201 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included. Sociodemographic and clinical data as well as laboratory biomarker results were obtained from medical records and the clinical laboratory information system. Three machine learning models were generated, trained, and internally validated: logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). The models were evaluated for sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), area under the curve (AUC), precision (P), SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) values, and the clinical utility of predictive models using decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: The predictive model included the following variables: type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), obesity, absolute neutrophil and basophil counts, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and D-dimer levels on the day of hospital admission. LR showed an Sn of 0.67, Sp of 0.65, AUC of 0.74, and P of 0.66. RF achieved an Sn of 0.87, Sp of 0.83, AUC of 0.96, and P of 0.85. XGBoost demonstrated an Sn of 0.87, Sp of 0.85, AUC of 0.95, and P of 0.86. Conclusions: Among the evaluated models, XGBoost showed robust predictive performance (Sn = 0.87, Sp = 0.85, AUC = 0.95, P = 0.86) and a favorable net clinical benefit in the decision curve analysis, confirming its suitability for predicting ICU admission in COVID-19 and aiding clinical decision-making.

Short-term acute outcomes by clinical and socioeconomic characteristics in adults with SARS-CoV-2: a population-based cohort study focused on the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected vulnerable populations in terms of comorbidity and socioeconomic disadvantage, both between and within countries. This retrospective population-based cohort study is part of the Horizon 2020 ORCHESTRA project, was conducted in the Emilia-Romagna (E-R) Region, and aimed to investigate the risk of hospitalization, disease severity and all-cause mortality during the 30 days following SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

All adult positive cases notified in E-R from 2020 to 2022 were included. Poisson regression with robust standard error was used to estimate risk ratios for the three outcomes, stratified by sex, pandemic period and adjusted for age, citizenship, deprivation index, risk of hospitalization and death score (RHDS), and vaccination status. Data sources were regional healthcare databases. Supplementary analyses considered citizenship in relation to duration of residency in E-R or aggregated in areas of origin.

RESULTS

During the first two years of the pandemic 859,653 E-R residents tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (47.8% males); 9.6% of them were citizens from high migratory pressure countries (HMPCs). The risk of severe outcomes increased steeply with age, especially in males. RHDS predicted worse outcomes in both sexes while vaccination showed a strong protective effect against all outcomes of acute infection (i.e., recent vaccination was 85% more protective against in-hospital severe disease in both sexes). Immigrants from HPMCs, especially females, showed a higher risk of hospitalization and in-hospital severe disease, in particular those who arrived within 5 years ago from the infection (RR for hospitalization = 1.92, 95%CI = 1.76-2.00 for males, and RR = 2.40, 95%CI = 2.23-2.59 for females), whereas the risk of all-cause mortality was lower compared to residents from low migratory pressure countries (LMPCs) that showed a RR for females of 0.73 (95%CI = 0.59-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

The results provided an overall view of course of acute COVID-19 outcomes in E-R and allowed the risk associated with clinical, demographic, and social characteristics to be measured. The findings suggest that, although national and regional public health policies have helped to mitigate the impact of the pandemic in the general population, inequalities in outcomes among persons with comorbidities and social disadvantages remain. Improvements in the appropriateness, effectiveness and equity of public health strategies are needed.

Dual-stream cross-modal fusion alignment network for survival analysis

Survival prediction serves as a pivotal component in precision oncology, enabling the optimization of treatment strategies through mortality risk assessment. While the integration of histopathological images and genomic profiles offers enhanced potential for patient stratification, existing methodologies are constrained by two fundamental limitations: (i) insufficient attention to fine-grained local features in favor of global representations, and (ii) suboptimal cross-modal fusion strategies that either neglect intrinsic correlations or discard modality-specific information. To address these challenges, we propose DSCASurv, a novel cross-modal fusion alignment framework designed to explore and integrate intrinsic correlations across multimodal data, thereby improving the accuracy of survival prediction. Specifically, DSCASurv leverages the local feature extraction capabilities of convolutional layers and the long-range dependency modeling of scanning state space models to extract intra-modal representations, while generating cross-modal representations through dual parallel mixer architectures. A cross-modal attention module functions as a bridge for inter-modal information exchange and complementary information transfer. The framework ultimately integrates all intra-modal representations to generate survival predictions by enhancing and recalibrating complementary information. Extensive experiments on five benchmark cancer datasets demonstrate the superior performance of our approach compared to existing methods.

Impact on clinical guideline adherence of Orient-COVID, a clinical decision support system based on dynamic decision trees for COVID19 management: A randomized simulation trial with medical trainees

BACKGROUND

The adherence of clinicians to clinical practice guidelines is known to be low, including for the management of COVID-19, due to their difficult use at the point of care and their complexity. Clinical decision support systems have been proposed to implement guidelines and improve adherence. One approach is to permit the navigation inside the recommendations, presented as a decision tree, but the size of the tree often limits this approach and may cause erroneous navigation, especially when it does not fit in a single screen.

METHODS

We proposed an innovative visual interface to allow clinicians easily navigating inside decision trees for the management of COVID-19 patients. It associates a multi-path tree model with the use of the fisheye visual technique, allowing the visualization of large decision trees in a single screen. To evaluate the impact of this tool on guideline adherence, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in a near-real simulation setting, comparing the decisions taken by medical trainees using Orient-COVID with those taken with paper guidelines or without guidance, when performing on six realistic clinical cases.

RESULTS

The results show that paper guidelines had no impact (p=0.97), while Orient-COVID significantly improved the guideline adherence compared to both other groups (p<0.0003). A significant impact of Orient-COVID was identified on several key points during the management of COVID-19: ordering troponin lab tests, prescribing anticoagulant and oxygen therapy. A multifactor analysis showed no difference between male and female participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an interactive decision tree for the management of COVID-19 significantly improved the clinician adherence to guidelines. Future works will focus on the integration of the system to electronic health records and on the adaptation of the system to other clinical conditions.

Predicting Severe COVID-19 Outcomes in the Elderly: The Role of Systemic Immune Inflammation, Liver Function Tests, and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio

Background: Patients aged 80 years and above are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic utility of the derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR), aspartate-aminotransferase-to-lymphocyte ratio index (ALRI), aspartate-aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index (APRI), and systemic immune inflammation index (SII) in predicting severe disease, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality among COVID-19 patients aged 80 years and older. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, 138 elderly patients (≥80 years) and 215 younger controls (<65 years) with confirmed COVID-19 were included. Laboratory data at admission were collected, and the dNLR, ALRI, APRI, and SII scores were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to assess the predictive performance of these indices. Results: The SII had the highest area under the ROC curve (AUC) for predicting severe disease in elderly patients (AUC = 0.857, 95% CI: 0.795-0.919, p < 0.001), with an optimal cutoff value of 920 × 10⁹/L (sensitivity 86%, specificity 78%). Elevated SII was significantly associated with increased risk of ICU admission (hazard ratio (HR): 2.9, 95% CI: 1.8-4.6, p < 0.001) and mortality (HR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.9-5.2, p < 0.001). Similarly, dNLR showed good predictive value (AUC = 0.792, 95% CI: 0.722-0.862, p < 0.001). Conclusions: SII and dNLR are valuable prognostic biomarkers for predicting severe outcomes in COVID-19 patients aged 80 years and above. Early identification using these indices can assist clinicians in risk stratification and management decisions to improve patient outcomes.

Higher intraindividual variability of body mass index is associated with elevated risk of COVID-19 related hospitalization and post-COVID conditions

BACKGROUND

Cardiometabolic diseases are risk factors for COVID-19 severity. The extent that cardiometabolic health represents a modifiable factor to mitigate the short- and long-term consequences from SARS-CoV-2 remains unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the associations between intraindividual variability of cardiometabolic health indicators and COVID-19 related hospitalizations and post-COVID conditions (PCC) among a relatively healthy population.

METHODS

This retrospective, multi-site cohort study was a post-hoc analysis among individuals with cardiometabolic health data collected during routine blood donation visits in 24 US states (2009-2018) and who responded to COVID-19 questionnaires (2021-2023). Intraindividual variability of blood pressure (systolic, diastolic), total circulating cholesterol, and body mass index (BMI) were defined as the coefficient of variation (CV) across all available donation timepoints (ranging from 3 to 74); participants were categorized into CV quartiles. Associations were evaluated by multivariable binomial regressions.

RESULTS

Overall, 3344 participants provided 42,090 donations (median 9 [IQR 5, 17]). The median age was 48 years (38, 56) at the first study donation. 1.2% (N = 40) were hospitalized due to COVID-19 and 15.5% (N = 519) had PCC. Higher BMI variability was associated with greater risk of COVID-19 hospitalization (4th quartile aRR 4.15 [95% CI 1.31, 13.11], p = 0.02; 3rd quartile aRR 3.41 [95% CI 1.09, 10.69], p = 0.04). Participants with higher variability of BMI had greater risk of PCC (4th quartile aRR 1.29 [95% CI 1.02, 1.64]; p = 0.04). Intraindividual variability of blood pressure (systolic, diastolic) and total circulating cholesterol were not associated with COVID-19 hospitalization or PCC risk (all p > 0.05). From causal mediation analysis, the association between the highest quartiles of BMI variability and PCC was not mediated by hospitalization (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher intraindividual variability of BMI was associated with COVID-19 hospitalization and PCC risk. Our findings underscore the need for further elucidating mechanisms that explain these associations and importance for consistent maintenance of body weight.

Prehospital Pandemic Respiratory Infection Emergency System Triage score can effectively predict the 30-day mortality of COVID-19 patients with pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with pneumonia should receive the guidance of initial risk stratification and early warning as soon as possible. Whether the prehospital Pandemic Respiratory Infection Emergency System Triage (PRIEST) score can accurately predict the short-term prognosis of them remains unknown. Accordingly, we aimed to assess the performance of prehospital PRIEST in predicting the 30-day mortality of patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the accuracy of five physiological parameters scores commonly used in prehospital disposal for mortality prediction using receiver operating characteristic curves and decision curve analysis. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was conducted to evaluate independent predictors associated with the 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 231 patients were included in this study, among which 23 cases (10.0%) died within 30 days after admission. Compared with survivor patients, non-survivor patients had greater numbers of comorbidities, signs and symptoms, complications, and physiological parameters scores and required greater prehospital care (p < 0.05). When the PRIEST score was >12, the sensitivity was 91.3%, and the specificity was 77.4%. We found that the area under the curve of the PRIEST score (0.887, p < 0.05) for mortality prediction was greater than that of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (0.724), CRB-65 (0.780), Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (0.809), and National Early Warning Score 2 (0.838). Moreover, prehospital PRIEST scores were positively correlated with numbers of comorbidities and numbers of prehospital treatment measures. The 30-day survival rate of patients with PRIEST scores ≤12 (98.8%) significantly exceeded that of patients with PRIEST scores >12 (69.1%) (p < 0.001). Prehospital PRIEST scores >12 (HR = 7.409) was one of the independent predictors of the 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The PRIEST can accurately, quickly, and conveniently predict the 30-day mortality of COVID-19 patients with pneumonia in the prehospital phase and can guide their initial risk stratification and treatment.

Accuracy of the Canadian COVID-19 Mortality Score (CCMS) to predict in-hospital mortality among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients infected with Omicron: a cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to externally validate and assess the opportunity to update the Canadian COVID-19 Mortality Score (CCMS) to predict in-hospital mortality among consecutive non-palliative COVID-19 patients infected with Omicron subvariants at a time when vaccinations were widespread.

DESIGN

This observational study validated the CCMS in an external cohort at a time when Omicron variants were dominant. We assessed the potential to update the rule and improve its performance by recalibrating and adding vaccination status in a subset of patients from provinces with access to vaccination data and created the adjusted CCMS (CCMSadj). We followed discharged patients for 30 days after their index emergency department visit or for their entire hospital stay if admitted.

SETTING

External validation cohort for CCMS: 36 hospitals participating in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN). Update cohort for CCMSadj: 14 hospitals in CCEDRRN in provinces with vaccination data.

PARTICIPANTS

Consecutive non-palliative COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

In-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Of 39 682 eligible patients, 1654 (4.2%) patients died. The CCMS included age, sex, residence type, arrival mode, chest pain, severe liver disease, respiratory rate and level of respiratory support and predicted in-hospital mortality with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.88) in external validation. Updating the rule by recalibrating and adding vaccination status to create the CCMSadj changed the weights for age, respiratory status and homelessness, but only marginally improved its performance, while vaccination status did not. The CCMSadj had an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.92) in validation. CCMSadj scores of <10 categorised patients as low risk with an in-hospital mortality of <1.6%. A score>15 had observed mortality of >56.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The CCMS remained highly accurate in predicting mortality from Omicron and improved marginally through recalibration. Adding vaccination status did not improve the performance. The CCMS can be used to inform patient prognosis, goals of care conversations and guide clinical decision-making for emergency department patients with COVID-19.

Evolving and Novel Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Thoracic Imaging

The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing medicine, particularly radiology. With the development of newer models, AI applications are demonstrating improved performance and versatile utility in the clinical setting. Thoracic imaging is an area of profound interest, given the prevalence of chest imaging and the significant health implications of thoracic diseases. This review aims to highlight the promising applications of AI within thoracic imaging. It examines the role of AI, including its contributions to improving diagnostic evaluation and interpretation, enhancing workflow, and aiding in invasive procedures. Next, it further highlights the current challenges and limitations faced by AI, such as the necessity of 'big data', ethical and legal considerations, and bias in representation. Lastly, it explores the potential directions for the application of AI in thoracic radiology.

Modeling for Prediction of Mortality Based on past Medical History in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Secondary Analysis

Introduction

Although COVID-19 is not currently a public health emergency, it will affect susceptible individuals in the post-COVID-19 era. Hence, the present study aimed to develop a model for Iranian patients to identify at-risk groups based on past medical history (PMHx) and some other factors affecting the death of patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Methods

A secondary study was conducted with the existing data of hospitalized COVID-19 adult patients in the hospitals covered by Iran University of Medical Sciences. PMHx was extracted from the registered ICD-10 codes. Stepwise logistic regression was used to predict mortality by PMHx and background covariates such as intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Crude population attributable fraction (PAF) as well as crude and adjusted odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported.

Results

A total of 8879 patients were selected with 19.68% mortality. Infectious and parasitic diseases' history showed the greatest association (OR = 5.72, 95% CI: 4.20, 7.82), while the greatest PAF was for cardiovascular system diseases (20.46%). According to logistic regression modeling, the largest effect, other than ICU admission and age, was for history of infectious and parasitic diseases (OR = 3.089, 95% CI: 2.13, 4.47). A good performance was achieved (area under curve = 0.875).

Conclusion

Considering the prevalence of underlying diseases, many mortality cases of COVID-19 are attributable to the history of cardiovascular disease. Future studies are needed for policy making regarding reduction of COVID-19 mortality in susceptible groups in the post-COVID-19 era.

Development and Validation of a Machine Learning COVID-19 Veteran (COVet) Deterioration Risk Score

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To develop the COVid Veteran (COVet) score for clinical deterioration in Veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 and further validate this model in both Veteran and non-Veteran samples. No such score has been derived and validated while incorporating a Veteran sample.

DERIVATION COHORT

Adults (age ≥ 18 yr) hospitalized outside the ICU with a diagnosis of COVID-19 for model development to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) (n = 80 hospitals).

VALIDATION COHORT

External validation occurred in a VHA cohort of 34 hospitals, as well as six non-Veteran health systems for further external validation (n = 21 hospitals) between 2020 and 2023.

PREDICTION MODEL

eXtreme Gradient Boosting machine learning methods were used, and performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and compared with the National Early Warning Score (NEWS). The primary outcome was transfer to the ICU or death within 24 hours of each new variable observation. Model predictor variables included demographics, vital signs, structured flowsheet data, and laboratory values.

RESULTS

A total of 96,908 admissions occurred during the study period, of which 59,897 were in the Veteran sample and 37,011 were in the non-Veteran sample. During external validation in the Veteran sample, the model demonstrated excellent discrimination, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.88. This was significantly higher than NEWS (0.79; p < 0.01). In the non-Veteran sample, the model also demonstrated excellent discrimination (0.86 vs. 0.79 for NEWS; p < 0.01). The top three variables of importance were eosinophil percentage, mean oxygen saturation in the prior 24-hour period, and worst mental status in the prior 24-hour period.

CONCLUSIONS

We used machine learning methods to develop and validate a highly accurate early warning score in both Veterans and non-Veterans hospitalized with COVID-19. The model could lead to earlier identification and therapy, which may improve outcomes.

sTREM-1 as a Predictive Biomarker for Disease Severity and Prognosis in COVID-19 Patients

Background

Research on biomarkers associated with the severity and adverse prognosis of COVID-19 can be beneficial for improving patient outcomes. However, there is limited research on the role of soluble TREM-1 (sTREM-1) in predicting the severity and prognosis of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

A total of 115 COVID-19 patients admitted to the emergency department of Beijing Youan Hospital from February to May 2023 were included in the study. Demographic information, laboratory measurements, and blood samples for sTREM-1 levels were collected upon admission.

Results

Our study found that sTREM-1 levels in the plasma of COVID-19 patients increased with the severity of the disease (moderate vs mild, p=0.0013; severe vs moderate, p=0.0195). sTREM-1 had good predictive value for disease severity and 28-day mortality (area under the ROC curve was 0.762 and 0.805, respectively). sTREM-1 also exhibited significant correlations with age, body temperature, respiratory rate, PaO2/FiO2, PCT, CRP, and CAR. Ultimately, through multivariate logistic regression analysis, we determined that sTREM-1 (OR 1.008, 95% CI: 1.002-1.013, p=0.005), HGB (OR 0.966, 95% CI: 0.935-0.998, p=0.036), D-dimer (OR 1.001, 95% CI: 1.000-1.001, p=0.009), and CAR (OR 1.761, 95% CI: 1.154-2.688, p=0.009) were independent predictors of 28-day mortality in COVID-19 patients. The combination of these four markers yielded a strong predictive value for 28-day mortality in COVID-19 cases with an AUC of 0.919 (95% CI: 0.857 -0.981).

Conclusion

sTREM-1 demonstrated good predictive value for disease severity and 28-day mortality, serving as an independent prognostic factor for adverse patient outcomes. In the future, we anticipate conducting large-scale multicenter studies to validate our research findings.

Presepsin as a prognostic biomarker in COVID-19 patients: combining clinical scoring systems and laboratory inflammatory markers for outcome prediction

BACKGROUND

There is still limited research on the prognostic value of Presepsin as a biomarker for predicting the outcome of COVID-19 patients. Additionally, research on the combined predictive value of Presepsin with clinical scoring systems and inflammation markers for disease prognosis is lacking.

METHODS

A total of 226 COVID-19 patients admitted to Beijing Youan Hospital's emergency department from May to November 2022 were screened. Demographic information, laboratory measurements, and blood samples for Presepsin levels were collected upon admission. The predictive value of Presepsin, clinical scoring systems, and inflammation markers for 28-day mortality was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 190 patients were analyzed, 83 (43.7%) were mild, 61 (32.1%) were moderate, and 46 (24.2%) were severe/critically ill. 23 (12.1%) patients died within 28 days. The Presepsin levels in severe/critical patients were significantly higher compared to moderate and mild patients (p < 0.001). Presepsin showed significant predictive value for 28-day mortality in COVID-19 patients, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.828 (95% CI: 0.737-0.920). Clinical scoring systems and inflammation markers also played a significant role in predicting 28-day outcomes. After Cox regression adjustment, Presepsin, qSOFA, NEWS2, PSI, CURB-65, CRP, NLR, CAR, and LCR were identified as independent predictors of 28-day mortality in COVID-19 patients (all p-values < 0.05). Combining Presepsin with clinical scoring systems and inflammation markers further enhanced the predictive value for patient prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Presepsin is a favorable indicator for the prognosis of COVID-19 patients, and its combination with clinical scoring systems and inflammation markers improved prognostic assessment.

A Systematic Review of Predictor Composition, Outcomes, Risk of Bias, and Validation of COVID-19 Prognostic Scores

BACKGROUND

Numerous prognostic scores have been published to support risk stratification for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review to identify the scores for confirmed or clinically assumed COVID-19 cases. An in-depth assessment and risk of bias (ROB) analysis (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool [PROBAST]) was conducted for scores fulfilling predefined criteria ([I] area under the curve [AUC)] ≥ 0.75; [II] a separate validation cohort present; [III] training data from a multicenter setting [≥2 centers]; [IV] point-scale scoring system).

RESULTS

Out of 1522 studies extracted from MEDLINE/Web of Science (20/02/2023), we identified 242 scores for COVID-19 outcome prognosis (mortality 109, severity 116, hospitalization 14, long-term sequelae 3). Most scores were developed using retrospective (75.2%) or single-center (57.1%) cohorts. Predictor analysis revealed the primary use of laboratory data and sociodemographic information in mortality and severity scores. Forty-nine scores were included in the in-depth analysis. The results indicated heterogeneous quality and predictor selection, with only five scores featuring low ROB. Among those, based on the number and heterogeneity of validation studies, only the 4C Mortality Score can be recommended for clinical application so far.

CONCLUSIONS

The application and translation of most existing COVID scores appear unreliable. Guided development and predictor selection would have improved the generalizability of the scores and may enhance pandemic preparedness in the future.

External validation of six COVID-19 prognostic models for predicting mortality risk in older populations in a hospital, primary care, and nursing home setting

OBJECTIVES

To systematically evaluate the performance of COVID-19 prognostic models and scores for mortality risk in older populations across three health-care settings: hospitals, primary care, and nursing homes.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

This retrospective external validation study included 14,092 older individuals of ≥70 years of age with a clinical or polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis from March 2020 to December 2020. The six validation cohorts include three hospital-based (CliniCo, COVID-OLD, COVID-PREDICT), two primary care-based (Julius General Practitioners Network/Academisch network huisartsgeneeskunde/Network of Academic general Practitioners, PHARMO), and one nursing home cohort (YSIS) in the Netherlands. Based on a living systematic review of COVID-19 prediction models using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool for quality and risk of bias assessment and considering predictor availability in validation cohorts, we selected six prognostic models predicting mortality risk in adults with COVID-19 infection (GAL-COVID-19 mortality, 4C Mortality Score, National Early Warning Score 2-extended model, Xie model, Wang clinical model, and CURB65 score). All six prognostic models were validated in the hospital cohorts and the GAL-COVID-19 mortality model was validated in all three healthcare settings. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality for hospitals and 28-day mortality for primary care and nursing home settings. Model performance was evaluated in each validation cohort separately in terms of discrimination, calibration, and decision curves. An intercept update was performed in models indicating miscalibration followed by predictive performance re-evaluation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

In-hospital mortality for hospitals and 28-day mortality for primary care and nursing home setting.

RESULTS

All six prognostic models performed poorly and showed miscalibration in the older population cohorts. In the hospital settings, model performance ranged from calibration-in-the-large -1.45 to 7.46, calibration slopes 0.24-0.81, and C-statistic 0.55-0.71 with 4C Mortality Score performing as the most discriminative and well-calibrated model. Performance across health-care settings was similar for the GAL-COVID-19 model, with a calibration-in-the-large in the range of -2.35 to -0.15 indicating overestimation, calibration slopes of 0.24-0.81 indicating signs of overfitting, and C-statistic of 0.55-0.71.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that most prognostic models for predicting mortality risk performed poorly in the older population with COVID-19, in each health-care setting: hospital, primary care, and nursing home settings. Insights into factors influencing predictive model performance in the older population are needed for pandemic preparedness and reliable prognostication of health-related outcomes in this demographic.

Development and Validation of a Robust and Interpretable Early Triaging Support System for Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Predictive Algorithm Modeling and Interpretation Study

BACKGROUND

Robust and accurate prediction of severity for patients with COVID-19 is crucial for patient triaging decisions. Many proposed models were prone to either high bias risk or low-to-moderate discrimination. Some also suffered from a lack of clinical interpretability and were developed based on early pandemic period data. Hence, there has been a compelling need for advancements in prediction models for better clinical applicability.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to develop and validate a machine learning-based Robust and Interpretable Early Triaging Support (RIETS) system that predicts severity progression (involving any of the following events: intensive care unit admission, in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation required, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation required) within 15 days upon hospitalization based on routinely available clinical and laboratory biomarkers.

METHODS

We included data from 5945 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from 19 hospitals in South Korea collected between January 2020 and August 2022. For model development and external validation, the whole data set was partitioned into 2 independent cohorts by stratified random cluster sampling according to hospital type (general and tertiary care) and geographical location (metropolitan and nonmetropolitan). Machine learning models were trained and internally validated through a cross-validation technique on the development cohort. They were externally validated using a bootstrapped sampling technique on the external validation cohort. The best-performing model was selected primarily based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and its robustness was evaluated using bias risk assessment. For model interpretability, we used Shapley and patient clustering methods.

RESULTS

Our final model, RIETS, was developed based on a deep neural network of 11 clinical and laboratory biomarkers that are readily available within the first day of hospitalization. The features predictive of severity included lactate dehydrogenase, age, absolute lymphocyte count, dyspnea, respiratory rate, diabetes mellitus, c-reactive protein, absolute neutrophil count, platelet count, white blood cell count, and saturation of peripheral oxygen. RIETS demonstrated excellent discrimination (AUROC=0.937; 95% CI 0.935-0.938) with high calibration (integrated calibration index=0.041), satisfied all the criteria of low bias risk in a risk assessment tool, and provided detailed interpretations of model parameters and patient clusters. In addition, RIETS showed potential for transportability across variant periods with its sustainable prediction on Omicron cases (AUROC=0.903, 95% CI 0.897-0.910).

CONCLUSIONS

RIETS was developed and validated to assist early triaging by promptly predicting the severity of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Its high performance with low bias risk ensures considerably reliable prediction. The use of a nationwide multicenter cohort in the model development and validation implicates generalizability. The use of routinely collected features may enable wide adaptability. Interpretations of model parameters and patients can promote clinical applicability. Together, we anticipate that RIETS will facilitate the patient triaging workflow and efficient resource allocation when incorporated into a routine clinical practice.

Predicting mortality risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: an early model utilizing clinical symptoms

BACKGROUND

Despite global efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic, the emergence of new viral strains continues to pose a significant threat. Accurate patient stratification, optimized resource allocation, and appropriate treatment are crucial in managing COVID-19 cases. To address this, a simple and accurate prognostic tool capable of rapidly identifying individuals at high risk of mortality is urgently needed. Early prognosis facilitates predicting treatment outcomes and enables effective patient management. The aim of this study was to develop an early predictive model for assessing mortality risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, utilizing baseline clinical factors.

METHODS

We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study involving a cohort of 375 COVID-19 patients admitted and treated at the COVID-19 Patient Treatment Center in Military Hospital 175 from October 2021 to December 2022.

RESULTS

Among the 375 patients, 246 and 129 patients were categorized into the survival and mortality groups, respectively. Our findings revealed six clinical factors that demonstrated independent predictive value for mortality in COVID-19 patients. These factors included age greater than 50 years, presence of multiple underlying diseases, dyspnea, acute confusion, saturation of peripheral oxygen below 94%, and oxygen demand exceeding 5 L per minute. We integrated these factors to develop the Military Hospital 175 scale (MH175), a prognostic scale demonstrating significant discriminatory ability with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87. The optimal cutoff value for predicting mortality risk using the MH175 score was determined to be ≥ 3 points, resulting in a sensitivity of 96.1%, specificity of 63.4%, positive predictive value of 58%, and negative predictive value of 96.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

The MH175 scale demonstrated a robust predictive capacity for assessing mortality risk in patients with COVID-19. Implementation of the MH175 scale in clinical settings can aid in patient stratification and facilitate the application of appropriate treatment strategies, ultimately reducing the risk of death. Therefore, the utilization of the MH175 scale holds significant potential to improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

An independent ethics committee approved the study (Research Ethics Committee of Military Hospital 175 (No. 3598GCN-HDDD; date: October 8, 2021), which was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice.

The Buzz Surrounding Precision Medicine: The Imperative of Incorporating It into Evidence-Based Medical Practice

Precision medicine (PM), through the integration of omics and environmental data, aims to provide a more precise prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of disease. Currently, PM is one of the emerging approaches in modern healthcare and public health, with wide implications for health care delivery, public health policy making formulation, and entrepreneurial endeavors. In spite of its growing popularity and the buzz surrounding it, PM is still in its nascent phase, facing considerable challenges that need to be addressed and resolved for it to attain the acclaim for which it strives. In this article, we discuss some of the current methodological pitfalls of PM, including the use of big data, and provide a perspective on how these challenges can be overcome by bringing PM closer to evidence-based medicine (EBM). Furthermore, to maximize the potential of PM, we present real-world illustrations of how EBM principles can be integrated into a PM approach.

Predicting Deterioration from Wearable Sensor Data in People with Mild COVID-19

Coronavirus has caused many casualties and is still spreading. Some people experience rapid deterioration that is mild at first. The aim of this study is to develop a deterioration prediction model for mild COVID-19 patients during the isolation period. We collected vital signs from wearable devices and clinical questionnaires. The derivation cohort consisted of people diagnosed with COVID-19 between September and December 2021, and the external validation cohort collected between March and June 2022. To develop the model, a total of 50 participants wore the device for an average of 77 h. To evaluate the model, a total of 181 infected participants wore the device for an average of 65 h. We designed machine learning-based models that predict deterioration in patients with mild COVID-19. The prediction model, 10 min in advance, showed an area under the receiver characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.99, and the prediction model, 8 h in advance, showed an AUC of 0.84. We found that certain variables that are important to model vary depending on the point in time to predict. Efficient deterioration monitoring in many patients is possible by utilizing data collected from wearable sensors and symptom self-reports.

The two-stage molecular scenery of SARS-CoV-2 infection with implications to disease severity: An in-silico quest

Introduction

The two-stage molecular profile of the progression of SARS-CoV-2 (SCOV2) infection is explored in terms of five key biological/clinical questions: (a) does SCOV2 exhibits a two-stage infection profile? (b) SARS-CoV-1 (SCOV1) vs. SCOV2: do they differ? (c) does and how SCOV2 differs from Influenza/INFL infection? (d) does low viral-load and (e) does COVID-19 early host response relate to the two-stage SCOV2 infection profile? We provide positive answers to the above questions by analyzing the time-series gene-expression profiles of preserved cell-lines infected with SCOV1/2 or, the gene-expression profiles of infected individuals with different viral-loads levels and different host-response phenotypes.

Methods

Our analytical methodology follows an in-silico quest organized around an elaborate multi-step analysis pipeline including: (a) utilization of fifteen gene-expression datasets from NCBI's gene expression omnibus/GEO repository; (b) thorough designation of SCOV1/2 and INFL progression stages and COVID-19 phenotypes; (c) identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and enriched biological processes and pathways that contrast and differentiate between different infection stages and phenotypes; (d) employment of a graph-based clustering process for the induction of coherent groups of networked genes as the representative core molecular fingerprints that characterize the different SCOV2 progression stages and the different COVID-19 phenotypes. In addition, relying on a sensibly selected set of induced fingerprint genes and following a Machine Learning approach, we devised and assessed the performance of different classifier models for the differentiation of acute respiratory illness/ARI caused by SCOV2 or other infections (diagnostic classifiers), as well as for the prediction of COVID-19 disease severity (prognostic classifiers), with quite encouraging results.

Results

The central finding of our experiments demonstrates the down-regulation of type-I interferon genes (IFN-1), interferon induced genes (ISGs) and fundamental innate immune and defense biological processes and molecular pathways during the early SCOV2 infection stages, with the inverse to hold during the later ones. It is highlighted that upregulation of these genes and pathways early after infection may prove beneficial in preventing subsequent uncontrolled hyperinflammatory and potentially lethal events.

Discussion

The basic aim of our study was to utilize in an intuitive, efficient and productive way the most relevant and state-of-the-art bioinformatics methods to reveal the core molecular mechanisms which govern the progression of SCOV2 infection and the different COVID-19 phenotypes.