Validation of reported risk factors for disease classification and prognosis in COVID-19: a descriptive and retrospective study
Tan, L.; Kang, X.; Ji, X.; Wang, Q.; li, Y.; Wang, Q.; Miao, H.
Show abstract
Risk indicators viral load (ORF1ab Ct), lymphocyte percentage (LYM%), C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), procalcitonin (PCT) and lactic acid (LA) in COVID-19 patients have been proposed in recent studies. However, the predictive effects of those indicators on disease classification and prognosis remains largely unknown. We dynamically measured those reported indicators in 132 cases of COVID-19 patients including the moderate-cured (moderated and cured), severe-cured (severe and cured) and critically ill (died). Our data showed that CRP, PCT, IL-6, LYM%, lactic acid and viral load could predict prognosis and guide classification of COVID-19 patients in different degrees. CRP, IL-6 and LYM% were more effective than other three factors in predicting prognosis. For disease classification, CRP and LYM% were sensitive in identifying the types between critically ill and severe (or moderate). Notably, among the investigated factors, LYM% was the only one that could distinguish between the severe and moderate types. Collectively, we concluded that LYM% was the most sensitive and reliable predictor for disease typing and prognosis. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the precise classification and prognosis prediction are critical for saving the insufficient medical resources, stratified treatment and improving the survival rate of critically ill patients. We recommend that LYM% be used independently or in combination with other indicators in the management of COVID-19.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Survival analysis of hospital length of stay of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia patients in Sichuan, China 96%
- Assessing the impact of the Gamma variant on COVID-19 Patient admissions in a Southern Brazilian tertiary hospital - A comparison of dual pandemic phases 95%
- Epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory findings for patients of different age groups with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a hospital in Saudi Arabia 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical findings in critical ill patients infected with SARS-Cov-2 in Guangdong Province, China: a multi-center, retrospective, observational study 97%
- Comparing COVID-19 and influenza presentation and trajectory 95%
- Clinical Characteristics and Short-Term Outcomes of Severe Patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Derivation and validation of a prognostic model for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients admitted with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: the PLANS (Platelet Lymphocyte Age Neutrophil Sex) model 94%
- Evaluation of the disease outcome in Covid-19 infected patients by disease symptoms: a retrospective cross-sectional study in Ilam Province, Iran 93%
- Correlation Analysis Between Disease Severity and Inflammation-related Parameters in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Relative expression of pro-inflammatory molecules in COVID-19 patients manifested disease severities 96%
- Early Clinical Factors Predicting the Development of Critical Disease in Japanese Patients with COVID-19: A Single-Center Retrospective, Observational Study 95%
- Probable causes and risk factors for positive SARS-CoV-2 test in recovered patients: Evidence from Brunei Darussalam 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Standard blood laboratory results in SARS-CoV-19 positive patients: do they show a typical pattern? 95%
- Rapid Clinical Screening and Staging for COVID-19 Severe Outcome A Hospitalization Study in New York City 94%
- COMPARISON OF sPLA2-IIA PERFORMANCE WITH HIGH-SENSITIVE CRP, NEUTROPHIL PERCENTAGE, PCT AND LACTATE TO IDENTIFY BACTERIAL INFECTION: A PROSPECTIVE STUDY 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.