Exposing Limitations of Clinical Laboratory Tests in COVID-19 and the Promise of Immunological Biomarkers

Author:

Sánchez-Montalvá AdriánORCID,Álvarez-Sierra DanielORCID,Martínez-Gallo MónicaORCID,Perurena-Prieto JanireORCID,Arrese-Muñoz IriaORCID,Rodríguez Juan Carlos RuizORCID,Espinosa-Pereiro JuanORCID,Bosch-Nicolau PauORCID,Martínez-Gómez XavierORCID,Anton AndrésORCID,Martínez-Valle FerranORCID,Riveiro-Barciela MarORCID,Blanco-Grau Albert,Rodríguez-Frias FranciscoORCID,Castellano-Escuder PolORCID,Poyatos-Canton ElisabetORCID,Bas-Minguet JordiORCID,Martínez-Cáceres EvaORCID,Sánchez-Pla AlexORCID,Zurera-Egea CoralORCID,Teniente-Serra AinaORCID,González Manuel HernándezORCID,Pujol-Borrell RicardoORCID,

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAlmost two years since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic no predictive algorithm has been generally adopted, nor new tests identified to improve the prediction and management of SARS-CoV-2 infection.MethodsRetrospective observational analysis of the predictive performance of clinical parameters and laboratory tests in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. Outcomes were 28-day survival and maximal severity in a cohort of 1,579 patients and two validation cohorts of 598 and 434 patients. A pilot study conducted in a patient subgroup measured 17 cytokines and 27 lymphocyte phenotypes to explore additional predictive laboratory tests.Findings1) Despite a strong association of 22 clinical and laboratory variables with the outcomes, their joint prediction power was limited due to redundancy. 2) Eight variables: age, comorbidity index, oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio, fibrinogen, and glomerular filtration rate captured most of the statistical predictive power. 3) The interpretation of clinical and laboratory variables was improved by grouping them in categories. 4) Age and organ damage-related tests were the best predictors of survival, and inflammatory-related tests were the best predictors of severity. 5) The pilot study identified several immunological tests (including chemokine ligand 10, chemokine ligand 2, and interleukin 1 receptor antagonist), that performed better than currently used tests.ConclusionsCurrently used tests for clinical management of COVID-19 patients are of limited predictive value due to redundancy, as all measure aspects of two major processes: inflammation, and organ damage. There are no independent predictors based on the quality of the nascent adaptive immune response. Understanding the limitations of current tests would improve their interpretation and simplify clinical management protocols. A systematic search for better biomarkers is urgent and feasible.This study was funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain, grants COV20/00416, Cov20/00654 and COV20/00388 to R.P–B, ATS and JBM respectively and co–financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). DÁ–S is recipient of a doctoral fellowship from the Vall d’Hebron Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain. ASM was supported by a postdoctoral grant “Juan Rodés” (JR18/00022) from Instituto de Salud Carlos III through the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, Spain

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3