Feng Wang1, Hongyan Hou1, Ting Wang1, Ying Luo1, Guoxing Tang1, Shiji Wu2, Hongmin Zhou3, Ziyong Sun4. 1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. 2. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. Electronic address: wilson547@163.com. 3. Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. Electronic address: amzhmin@126.com. 4. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. Electronic address: zysun@tjh.tjmu.edu.cn.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There are currently no satisfactory methods for predicting the outcome of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this study is to establish a model for predicting the prognosis of the disease. METHODS: The laboratory results were collected from 54 deceased COVID-19 patients on admission and before death. Another 54 recovered COVID-19 patients were enrolled as control cases. RESULTS: Many laboratory indicators, such as neutrophils, AST, γ-GT, ALP, LDH, NT-proBNP, Hs-cTnT, PT, APTT, D-dimer, IL-2R, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, TNF-α, CRP, ferritin and procalcitonin, were all significantly increased in deceased patients compared with recovered patients on admission. In contrast, other indicators such as lymphocytes, platelets, total protein and albumin were significantly decreased in deceased patients on admission. Some indicators such as neutrophils and procalcitonin, others such as lymphocytes and platelets, continuously increased or decreased from admission to death in deceased patients respectively. Using these indicators alone had moderate performance in differentiating between recovered and deceased COVID-19 patients. A model based on combination of four indicators (P = 1/[1 + e-(-2.658+0.587×neutrophils - 2.087×lymphocytes - 0.01×platelets+0.004×IL-2R)]) showed good performance in predicting the death of COVID-19 patients. When cutoff value of 0.572 was used, the sensitivity and specificity of the prediction model were 90.74% and 94.44%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using the current indicators alone is of modest value in differentiating between recovered and deceased COVID-19 patients. A prediction model based on combination of neutrophils, lymphocytes, platelets and IL-2R shows good performance in predicting the outcome of COVID-19.
INTRODUCTION: There are currently no satisfactory methods for predicting the outcome of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this study is to establish a model for predicting the prognosis of the disease. METHODS: The laboratory results were collected from 54 deceased COVID-19patients on admission and before death. Another 54 recovered COVID-19patients were enrolled as control cases. RESULTS: Many laboratory indicators, such as neutrophils, AST, γ-GT, ALP, LDH, NT-proBNP, Hs-cTnT, PT, APTT, D-dimer, IL-2R, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, TNF-α, CRP, ferritin and procalcitonin, were all significantly increased in deceased patients compared with recovered patients on admission. In contrast, other indicators such as lymphocytes, platelets, total protein and albumin were significantly decreased in deceased patients on admission. Some indicators such as neutrophils and procalcitonin, others such as lymphocytes and platelets, continuously increased or decreased from admission to death in deceased patients respectively. Using these indicators alone had moderate performance in differentiating between recovered and deceased COVID-19patients. A model based on combination of four indicators (P = 1/[1 + e-(-2.658+0.587×neutrophils - 2.087×lymphocytes - 0.01×platelets+0.004×IL-2R)]) showed good performance in predicting the death of COVID-19patients. When cutoff value of 0.572 was used, the sensitivity and specificity of the prediction model were 90.74% and 94.44%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using the current indicators alone is of modest value in differentiating between recovered and deceased COVID-19patients. A prediction model based on combination of neutrophils, lymphocytes, platelets and IL-2R shows good performance in predicting the outcome of COVID-19.
Authors: Chuan Hong; Harrison G Zhang; Sehi L'Yi; Andrew South; Gabriel A Brat; T Cai; Griffin Weber; Paul Avillach; Bryce W Q Tan; Alba Gutiérrez-Sacristán; Clara-Lea Bonzel; Nathan P Palmer; Alberto Malovini; Valentina Tibollo; Yuan Luo; Meghan R Hutch; Molei Liu; Florence Bourgeois; Riccardo Bellazzi; Luca Chiovato; Fernando J Sanz Vidorreta; Trang T Le; Xuan Wang; William Yuan; Antoine Neuraz; Vincent Benoit; Bertrand Moal; Michele Morris; David A Hanauer; Sarah Maidlow; Kavishwar Wagholikar; Shawn Murphy; Hossein Estiri; Adeline Makoudjou; Patric Tippmann; Jeffery Klann; Robert W Follett; Nils Gehlenborg; Gilbert S Omenn; Zongqi Xia; Arianna Dagliati; Shyam Visweswaran; Lav P Patel; Danielle L Mowery; Emily R Schriver; Malarkodi Jebathilagam Samayamuthu; Ramakanth Kavuluru; Sara Lozano-Zahonero; Daniela Zöller; Amelia L M Tan; Byorn W L Tan; Kee Yuan Ngiam; John H Holmes; Petra Schubert; Kelly Cho; Yuk-Lam Ho; Brett K Beaulieu-Jones; Miguel Pedrera-Jiménez; Noelia García-Barrio; Pablo Serrano-Balazote; Isaac Kohane Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Oliver J McElvaney; Brian D Hobbs; Dandi Qiao; Oisín F McElvaney; Matthew Moll; Natalie L McEvoy; Jennifer Clarke; Eoin O'Connor; Seán Walsh; Michael H Cho; Gerard F Curley; Noel G McElvaney Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2020-10-08 Impact factor: 8.143
Authors: Alexandra Kvernland; Arooshi Kumar; Shadi Yaghi; Eytan Raz; Jennifer Frontera; Ariane Lewis; Barry Czeisler; D Ethan Kahn; Ting Zhou; Koto Ishida; Jose Torres; Howard A Riina; Maksim Shapiro; Erez Nossek; Peter K Nelson; Omar Tanweer; David Gordon; Rajan Jain; Seena Dehkharghani; Nils Henninger; Adam de Havenon; Brian Mac Grory; Aaron Lord; Kara Melmed Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2020-08-24 Impact factor: 3.210