Verena Schöning1, Evangelia Liakoni1, Christine Baumgartner2, Aristomenis K Exadaktylos3, Wolf E Hautz3, Andrew Atkinson4,5, Felix Hammann6. 1. Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of General Internal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 2. Department of General Internal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 4. Pediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics Research Group, University Children's Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 5. Department of Infectious Diseases, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 6. Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of General Internal Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. Felix.Hammann@insel.ch.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical risk scores and machine learning models based on routine laboratory values could assist in automated early identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients at risk for severe clinical outcomes. They can guide patient triage, inform allocation of health care resources, and contribute to the improvement of clinical outcomes. METHODS: In- and out-patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the Insel Hospital Group Bern, Switzerland, between February 1st and August 31st ('first wave', n = 198) and September 1st through November 16th 2020 ('second wave', n = 459) were used as training and prospective validation cohort, respectively. A clinical risk stratification score and machine learning (ML) models were developed using demographic data, medical history, and laboratory values taken up to 3 days before, or 1 day after, positive testing to predict severe outcomes of hospitalization (a composite endpoint of admission to intensive care, or death from any cause). Test accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Sex, C-reactive protein, sodium, hemoglobin, glomerular filtration rate, glucose, and leucocytes around the time of first positive testing (- 3 to + 1 days) were the most predictive parameters. AUROC of the risk stratification score on training data (AUROC = 0.94, positive predictive value (PPV) = 0.97, negative predictive value (NPV) = 0.80) were comparable to the prospective validation cohort (AUROC = 0.85, PPV = 0.91, NPV = 0.81). The most successful ML algorithm with respect to AUROC was support vector machines (median = 0.96, interquartile range = 0.85-0.99, PPV = 0.90, NPV = 0.58). CONCLUSION: With a small set of easily obtainable parameters, both the clinical risk stratification score and the ML models were predictive for severe outcomes at our tertiary hospital center, and performed well in prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Clinical risk scores and machine learning models based on routine laboratory values could assist in automated early identification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients at risk for severe clinical outcomes. They can guide patient triage, inform allocation of health care resources, and contribute to the improvement of clinical outcomes. METHODS: In- and out-patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the Insel Hospital Group Bern, Switzerland, between February 1st and August 31st ('first wave', n = 198) and September 1st through November 16th 2020 ('second wave', n = 459) were used as training and prospective validation cohort, respectively. A clinical risk stratification score and machine learning (ML) models were developed using demographic data, medical history, and laboratory values taken up to 3 days before, or 1 day after, positive testing to predict severe outcomes of hospitalization (a composite endpoint of admission to intensive care, or death from any cause). Test accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Sex, C-reactive protein, sodium, hemoglobin, glomerular filtration rate, glucose, and leucocytes around the time of first positive testing (- 3 to + 1 days) were the most predictive parameters. AUROC of the risk stratification score on training data (AUROC = 0.94, positive predictive value (PPV) = 0.97, negative predictive value (NPV) = 0.80) were comparable to the prospective validation cohort (AUROC = 0.85, PPV = 0.91, NPV = 0.81). The most successful ML algorithm with respect to AUROC was support vector machines (median = 0.96, interquartile range = 0.85-0.99, PPV = 0.90, NPV = 0.58). CONCLUSION: With a small set of easily obtainable parameters, both the clinical risk stratification score and the ML models were predictive for severe outcomes at our tertiary hospital center, and performed well in prospective validation.
Authors: Christopher M Petrilli; Simon A Jones; Jie Yang; Harish Rajagopalan; Luke O'Donnell; Yelena Chernyak; Katie A Tobin; Robert J Cerfolio; Fritz Francois; Leora I Horwitz Journal: BMJ Date: 2020-05-22
Authors: Enrico Maria Trecarichi; Maria Mazzitelli; Francesca Serapide; Maria Chiara Pelle; Bruno Tassone; Eugenio Arrighi; Graziella Perri; Paolo Fusco; Vincenzo Scaglione; Chiara Davoli; Rosaria Lionello; Valentina La Gamba; Giuseppina Marrazzo; Maria Teresa Busceti; Amerigo Giudice; Marco Ricchio; Anna Cancelliere; Elena Lio; Giada Procopio; Francesco Saverio Costanzo; Daniela Patrizia Foti; Giovanni Matera; Carlo Torti Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Ana Campos Codo; Gustavo Gastão Davanzo; Lauar de Brito Monteiro; Gabriela Fabiano de Souza; Stéfanie Primon Muraro; João Victor Virgilio-da-Silva; Juliana Silveira Prodonoff; Victor Corasolla Carregari; Carlos Alberto Oliveira de Biagi Junior; Fernanda Crunfli; Jeffersson Leandro Jimenez Restrepo; Pedro Henrique Vendramini; Guilherme Reis-de-Oliveira; Karina Bispo Dos Santos; Daniel A Toledo-Teixeira; Pierina Lorencini Parise; Matheus Cavalheiro Martini; Rafael Elias Marques; Helison R Carmo; Alexandre Borin; Laís Durço Coimbra; Vinícius O Boldrini; Natalia S Brunetti; Andre S Vieira; Eli Mansour; Raisa G Ulaf; Ana F Bernardes; Thyago A Nunes; Luciana C Ribeiro; Andre C Palma; Marcus V Agrela; Maria Luiza Moretti; Andrei C Sposito; Fabrício Bíscaro Pereira; Licio Augusto Velloso; Marco Aurélio Ramirez Vinolo; André Damasio; José Luiz Proença-Módena; Robson Francisco Carvalho; Marcelo A Mori; Daniel Martins-de-Souza; Helder I Nakaya; Alessandro S Farias; Pedro M Moraes-Vieira Journal: Cell Metab Date: 2020-07-17 Impact factor: 27.287
Authors: Laure Wynants; Ben Van Calster; Gary S Collins; Richard D Riley; Georg Heinze; Ewoud Schuit; Marc M J Bonten; Darren L Dahly; Johanna A A Damen; Thomas P A Debray; Valentijn M T de Jong; Maarten De Vos; Paul Dhiman; Maria C Haller; Michael O Harhay; Liesbet Henckaerts; Pauline Heus; Michael Kammer; Nina Kreuzberger; Anna Lohmann; Kim Luijken; Jie Ma; Glen P Martin; David J McLernon; Constanza L Andaur Navarro; Johannes B Reitsma; Jamie C Sergeant; Chunhu Shi; Nicole Skoetz; Luc J M Smits; Kym I E Snell; Matthew Sperrin; René Spijker; Ewout W Steyerberg; Toshihiko Takada; Ioanna Tzoulaki; Sander M J van Kuijk; Bas van Bussel; Iwan C C van der Horst; Florien S van Royen; Jan Y Verbakel; Christine Wallisch; Jack Wilkinson; Robert Wolff; Lotty Hooft; Karel G M Moons; Maarten van Smeden Journal: BMJ Date: 2020-04-07
Authors: Luciano Frassanito; Pietro Paolo Giuri; Francesco Vassalli; Alessandra Piersanti; Alessia Longo; Bruno Antonio Zanfini; Stefano Catarci; Anna Fagotti; Giovanni Scambia; Gaetano Draisci Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2021-10-07 Impact factor: 1.977
Authors: Emanuela Sozio; Nathan A Moore; Martina Fabris; Andrea Ripoli; Francesca Rumbolo; Marilena Minieri; Riccardo Boverio; María Dolores Rodríguez Mulero; Sara Lainez-Martinez; Mónica Martínez Martínez; Dolores Calvo; Claudia Gregoriano; Rebecca Williams; Luca Brazzi; Alessandro Terrinoni; Tiziana Callegari; Marta Hernández Olivo; Patricia Esteban-Torrella; Ismael Calcerrada; Luca Bernasconi; Stephen P Kidd; Francesco Sbrana; Iria Miguens; Kirsty Gordon; Daniela Visentini; Jacopo M Legramante; Flavio Bassi; Nicholas Cortes; Giorgia Montrucchio; Vito N Di Lecce; Ernesto C Lauritano; Luis García de Guadiana-Romualdo; Juan González Del Castillo; Enrique Bernal-Morell; David Andaluz-Ojeda; Philipp Schuetz; Francesco Curcio; Carlo Tascini; Kordo Saeed Journal: Respir Res Date: 2022-08-28
Authors: Richard Du; Efstratios D Tsougenis; Joshua W K Ho; Joyce K Y Chan; Keith W H Chiu; Benjamin X H Fang; Ming Yen Ng; Siu-Ting Leung; Christine S Y Lo; Ho-Yuen F Wong; Hiu-Yin S Lam; Long-Fung J Chiu; Tiffany Y So; Ka Tak Wong; Yiu Chung I Wong; Kevin Yu; Yiu-Cheong Yeung; Thomas Chik; Joanna W K Pang; Abraham Ka-Chung Wai; Michael D Kuo; Tina P W Lam; Pek-Lan Khong; Ngai-Tseung Cheung; Varut Vardhanabhuti Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-07-09 Impact factor: 4.379