Effect of the Timing of Amubarvimab/Romlusevimab (BRII-196/198) Administration on Progression to Severe Disease in Elderly Patients with COVID-19 Infection: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective Early intervention with neutralizing antibodies is considered to be effective in preventing disease progression in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 infection. Elderly patients are the most susceptible and at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection. The present study aimed to assess the necessity and possible clinical benefits of the early administration of Amubarvimab/Romlusevimab (BRII-196/198) in the elderly population. Methods The present study was designed as a retrospective, multi-center cohort study conducted with 90 COVID-19 patients aged over 60, who were divided into two groups based on the timing of the administration of BRII-196/198 (administration at ≤ 3 days or > 3 days from the onset of infection symptoms). Results The ≤ 3 days group exhibited a greater positive effect (HR 5.94, 95% CI, 1.42–24.83;P < 0.01), with only 2 patients among 21 patients (9.52%) exhibiting disease progression, compared to the 31 patients among the 69 patients (44.93%) of the > 3 days group who exhibited disease progression. The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed low flow oxygen support prior to BRII-196/198 administration (HR 3.53, 95% CI 1.42–8.77, P < 0.01) and PLT class (HR 3.68, 95% CI 1.37–9.91, P < 0.01) as independent predictors of disease progression. Conclusions In elderly patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 disease, who do not require oxygen support and had the risk factors for disease progression to severe COVID-19 disease, the administration of BRII-196/198 within 3 days resulted in a beneficial trend in terms of preventing disease progression.

Visual analysis of the prevention and control measures of COVID-19 in Chinese ports.

In 2022, COVID-19 solutions in China have entered a normal stage, and the solutions imported from ports have been transformed from emergency prevention and control measures to investigative long-term prevention and control measures. Therefore, it is necessary to study solutions for COVID-19 at border ports. In this study, 170 research papers related to the prevention and control measures of COVID-19 at ports from 2020 to September 2022 were retrieved from Wanfang database, HowNet database, Wip database, and WoS core collection. Citespace 6.1.R2 software was used to research institutions visualize and analyze researchers and keywords to explore their research hotspots and trends. After analysis, the overall volume of documents issued in the past 3 years was stable. The major contributors are scientific research teams such as the Chinese Academy of Inspection and Quarantine Sciences (Han Hui et al.) and Beijing Customs (Sun Xiaodong et al.), with less cross-agency cooperation. The top five high-frequency keywords with cumulative frequency are as follows: COVID-19 (29 times), epidemic prevention and control (29 times), ports (28 times), health quarantine (16 times), and risk assessment (16 times). The research hotspots in the field of prevention and control measures for COVID-19 at ports are constantly changing with the progress of epidemic prevention and control. Cooperation between research institutions needs to be strengthened urgently. The research hotspots are the imported epidemic prevention and control, risk assessment, port health quarantine, and the normalized epidemic prevention and control mechanism, which is the trend of research and needs further exploration in the future.

Effect of EIT-guided PEEP titration on prognosis of patients with moderate to severe ARDS: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory syndrome distress (ARDS) is a clinical common syndrome with high mortality. Electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration can achieve the compromise between lung overdistension and collapse which may minimize ventilator-induced lung injury in these patients. However, the effect of EIT-guided PEEP titration on the clinical outcomes remains unknown. The objective of this trial is to investigate the effects of EIT-guided PEEP titration on the clinical outcomes for moderate or severe ARDS, compared to the low fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2)-PEEP table. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, parallel-group, adaptive designed, randomized controlled trial (RCT) with intention-to-treat analysis. Adult patients with moderate to severe ARDS less than 72 h after diagnosis will be included in this study. Participants in the intervention group will receive PEEP titrated by EIT with a stepwise decrease PEEP trial, whereas participants in the control group will select PEEP based on the low FiO2-PEEP table. Other ventilator parameters will be set according to the ARDSNet strategy. Participants will be followed up until 28 days after enrollment. Three hundred seventy-six participants will be recruited based on a 15% decrease of 28-day mortality in the intervention group, with an interim analysis for sample size re-estimation and futility assessment being undertaken once 188 participants have been recruited. The primary outcome is 28-day mortality. The secondary outcomes include ventilator-free days and shock-free days at day 28, length of ICU and hospital stay, the rate of successful weaning, proportion requiring rescue therapies, compilations, respiratory variables, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA). DISCUSSION: As a heterogeneous syndrome, ARDS has different responses to treatment and further results in different clinical outcomes. PEEP selection will depend on the properties of patients and can be individually achieved by EIT. This study will be the largest randomized trial to investigate thoroughly the effect of individual PEEP titrated by EIT in moderate to severe ARDS patients to date. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT05207202. First published on January 26, 2022.

Value of Laboratory Indicators in Predicting Pneumonia in Symptomatic COVID-19 Patients Infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant.

Background: The pathogenicity of Omicron is different from that of the previous strains. The value of hematological indicators in patients at high risk of Omicron infection remains unclear. We need rapid, inexpensive and widely available biomarkers to guide the early detection of people at risk of pneumonia and to provide early intervention. We aimed to assess the value of hematological indicators as risk factors for pneumonia in symptomatic COVID-19 patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. Patients and Methods: The study enrolled 144 symptomatic COVID-19 patients with Omicron infection. We collected available clinical details, including laboratory tests and CT examinations. Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were used to assess the value of laboratory markers in predicting the development of pneumonia. Results: Among the 144 patients, 50 (34.7%) had pneumonia. The ROC analysis revealed that the areas under the ROC curve (AUC) for leukocytes, lymphocytes, neutrophils, and fibrinogen were 0.603 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.501-0.704, P=0.043), 0.615 (95% CI: 0.517-0.712, P=0.024), 0.632 (95% CI: 0.534-0.730, P=0.009) and 0.635 (95% CI: 0.539-0.730, P=0.008), respectively. The AUC for neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte to lymphocyte ratio (MLR), fibrinogen to lymphocyte ratio (FLR), and fibrinogen to D-dimer ratio (FDR) were 0.670 (95% CI: 0.580-0.760, P=0.001), 0.632 (95% CI: 0.535-0.728, P=0.009), 0.669 (95% CI: 0.575-0.763, P=0.001) and 0.615 (95% CI: 0.510-0.721, P=0.023), respectively. Univariate analysis showed that elevated levels of NLR (odds ratio (OR): 1.219, 95% CI: 1.046-1.421, P=0.011), FLR (OR: 1.170, 95% CI: 1.014-1.349, P=0.031) and FDR (OR: 1.131, 95% CI: 1.039-1.231, P=0.005) were significantly correlated with the presence of pneumonia. Multivariate analysis indicated elevated NLR (OR: 1.248, 95% CI: 1.068-1.459, P=0.005) and FDR (OR: 1.160, 95% CI: 1.054-1.276, P=0.002) levels were associated with the existence of pneumonia. The AUC for the combination of NLR and FDR was 0.701 (95% CI: 0.606-0.796, P<0.001, sensitivity 56.0%, specificity 83.0%). Conclusion: NLR and FDR can predict the presence of pneumonia in symptomatic COVID-19 patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.

Clinical characteristics of patients infected with novel coronavirus wild strain, Delta variant strain and Omicron variant strain in Quanzhou: A real‑world study

This study aimed to investigate the clinical features of patients infected with novel coronavirus wild strains, Delta variant strains and Omicron variant strains to provide a reference for early clinical diagnosis and prognostic assessment. The demographic, clinical symptoms and ancillary examination data of 47 patients with novel coronavirus wild type strain infection, 18 with Delta variant infection and 20 with Omicron variant infection admitted to the First Hospital of Quanzhou affiliated with Fujian Medical University were collected and analyzed. The novel coronavirus wild strain and Delta strain were the predominant clinical types;patients infected with the Omicron strain were mainly asymptomatic. Fever and fatigue were the main clinical manifestations in the wild strain and Delta strain groups, whereas dry cough, nasal congestion, sore throat and fever were common clinical manifestations in the Omicron strain group. The Delta strain and Omicron variant groups had fewer comorbidities than the wild-type strain group, but no significant reduction was observed in the negative conversion time of nucleic acids. Significant differences were found in the neutrophil count/lymphocyte count ratio, lymphocyte count, eosinophil count, red blood cell count, hemoglobin level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, prothrombin time, international normalized ratio and plasma D-dimer, PH, PaO2, lactic acid and albumin levels among the three groups. Patients infected with the Omicron strain in Quanzhou presented with mild symptoms of the upper respiratory tract as the primary clinical manifestation and had few comorbidities and a good prognosis;however, the negative conversion time of the new coronavirus nucleic acid was still considerably long. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Experimental & Therapeutic Medicine is the property of Spandidos Publications UK Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

An expanded definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome: Challenging the status quo.

Although the Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), 2012 has been widely used in clinical practice, issues have occasionally been raised regarding various criteria since it was proposed. High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is widely used for effective respiratory support in acute respiratory failure. As patients who do not require ventilation but meet the Berlin criteria have similar characteristics to those with ARDS, the definition of ARDS may be broadened to include patients receiving HFNO. As the PaO2/FiO2 under-recognizes the diagnosis of ARDS, a SpO2/FiO2 value of ≤315 may be considered instead of a PaO2/FiO2 value of ≤300 for diagnosing the condition in resource-constrained settings. In this context, patients with severe COVID-19 always meet other criteria for ARDS except for 7-day acute onset. Therefore, the timeframe for the onset of ARDS may be extended to up to 14 days. An expanded definition of ARDS may allow early identification of patients with less severe diseases and facilitate testing and application of new therapies in patients with a high risk of poor outcomes. Here, we discuss the major controversies regarding the extension of the ARDS definition with a view to improving clinical implementation and patient outcomes.

It is time to update the ARDS definition: It starts with COVID-19-induced respiratory failure.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may rapidly worsen respiratory failure, thereby leading to death. COVID-19-induced respiratory failure exhibits some atypical characteristics, silent hypoxemia, and high lung compliance. Some histopathological changes associated with COVID-19-induced respiratory failure differ from those of classic acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, compared with classical ARDS, COVID-19-induced respiratory failure has a similar timing of onset, clinical syndromes, radiological profile, and mortality rate in the intensive care unit (ICU). Respiratory failure induced by COVID-19 is a type of ARDS and is currently underdiagnosed. This condition stretches the definition of classic ARDS; therefore, an updated definition is warranted.

Clinical characteristics of patients infected with novel coronavirus wild strain, Delta variant strain and Omicron variant strain in Quanzhou: A real­world study.

This study aimed to investigate the clinical features of patients infected with novel coronavirus wild strains, Delta variant strains and Omicron variant strains to provide a reference for early clinical diagnosis and prognostic assessment. The demographic, clinical symptoms and ancillary examination data of 47 patients with novel coronavirus wild type strain infection, 18 with Delta variant infection and 20 with Omicron variant infection admitted to the First Hospital of Quanzhou affiliated with Fujian Medical University were collected and analyzed. The novel coronavirus wild strain and Delta strain were the predominant clinical types; patients infected with the Omicron strain were mainly asymptomatic. Fever and fatigue were the main clinical manifestations in the wild strain and Delta strain groups, whereas dry cough, nasal congestion, sore throat and fever were common clinical manifestations in the Omicron strain group. The Delta strain and Omicron variant groups had fewer comorbidities than the wild-type strain group, but no significant reduction was observed in the negative conversion time of nucleic acids. Significant differences were found in the neutrophil count/lymphocyte count ratio, lymphocyte count, eosinophil count, red blood cell count, hemoglobin level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, prothrombin time, international normalized ratio and plasma D-dimer, PH, PaO2, lactic acid and albumin levels among the three groups. Patients infected with the Omicron strain in Quanzhou presented with mild symptoms of the upper respiratory tract as the primary clinical manifestation and had few comorbidities and a good prognosis; however, the negative conversion time of the new coronavirus nucleic acid was still considerably long.

Early decrease of ventilatory ratio after prone position ventilation may predict successful weaning in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Previous studies usually identified patients who benefit the most from prone positioning by oxygenation improvement. However, inconsistent results have been reported. Physiologically, pulmonary dead space fraction may be more appropriate in evaluating the prone response. As an easily calculated bedside index, ventilatory ratio (VR) correlates well with pulmonary dead space fraction. Hence, we investigated whether the change in VR after prone positioning is associated with weaning outcomes at day 28 and to identify patients who will benefit the most from prone positioning. Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study was performed in a group of mechanically ventilated, non-COVID ARDS patients who received prone positioning in the ICU at Zhongda hospital, Southeast University. The primary outcome was the rate of successful weaning patients at day 28. Arterial blood gas results and corresponding ventilatory parameters on five different time points around the first prone positioning were collected, retrospectively. VR responders were identified by Youden's index. Competing-risk regression models were used to identify the association between the VR change and liberation from mechanical ventilation at day 28. Results: One hundred and three ARDS patients receiving prone positioning were included, of whom 53 (51%) successfully weaned from the ventilator at day 28. VR responders were defined as patients showing a decrease in VR of greater than or equal to 0.037 from the baseline to within 4 h after prone. VR responders have significant longer ventilator-free days, higher successful weaning rates and lower mortality compared with non-responders at day 28. And a significant between-group difference exists in the respiratory mechanics improvement after prone (P < 0.05). A linear relationship was also found between VR change and compliance of the respiratory system (Crs) change after prone (r = 0.32, P = 0.025). In the multivariable competing-risk analysis, VR change (sHR 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35-0.92) was independently associated with liberation from mechanical ventilation at day 28. Conclusion: Ventilatory ratio decreased more significantly within 4 h after prone positioning in patients with successful weaning at day 28. VR change was independently associated with liberation from mechanical ventilation at day 28.

The Efficiency of Convalescent Plasma Therapy in the Management of Critically Ill Patients Infected With COVID-19: A Matched Cohort Study.

Background: The convalescent plasma of patients who recover from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contains high titers of neutralizing antibodies, which has potential effects on the viral shedding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and improving the prognosis of patients with COVID-19. The goal of this study was to clarify the effects of convalescent plasma therapy on the 60-day mortality and negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 during the hospitalization of patients with severe and life-threatening COVID-19 infection. Methods: This was a retrospective, case-matched cohort study that involved patients with severe COVID-19 infections. The patients who received convalescent plasma therapy were matched by age, sex, diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, the onset of symptoms to hospital admission, respiratory support pattern, lymphocyte count, troponin, Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), glucocorticoid, and antiviral agents to no more than three patients with COVID-19 who did not receive convalescent plasma therapy. A Cox regression model and competing risk analysis were used to evaluate the effects of convalescent plasma therapy on these patients. Results: Twenty-six patients were in the convalescent plasma therapy group, and 78 patients were in the control group. Demographic characteristics were similar in both groups, except for the SOFA score. Convalescent plasma therapy did not improve 60-day mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.44, 95% CI 0.82-2.51, p = 0.20], but the SARS-CoV-2 negative conversion rate for 60 days after admission was higher in the convalescent plasma group (26.9 vs. 65.4%, p = 0.002) than in the control. Then, a competing risk analysis was performed, which considered events of interest (the negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2) and competing events (death) in the same model. Convalescent plasma therapy improved events of interest (p = 0.0002). Conclusion: Convalescent plasma therapy could improve the SARS-CoV-2 negative conversion rate but could not improve 60-day mortality in patients with severe and life-threatening COVID-19 infection. Clinical Trial Number: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04616976).

The Efficiency of Convalescent Plasma Therapy in the Management of Critically Ill Patients Infected With COVID-19: A Matched Cohort Study

Background The convalescent plasma of patients who recover from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contains high titers of neutralizing antibodies, which has potential effects on the viral shedding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and improving the prognosis of patients with COVID-19. The goal of this study was to clarify the effects of convalescent plasma therapy on the 60-day mortality and negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 during the hospitalization of patients with severe and life-threatening COVID-19 infection. Methods This was a retrospective, case-matched cohort study that involved patients with severe COVID-19 infections. The patients who received convalescent plasma therapy were matched by age, sex, diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, the onset of symptoms to hospital admission, respiratory support pattern, lymphocyte count, troponin, Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), glucocorticoid, and antiviral agents to no more than three patients with COVID-19 who did not receive convalescent plasma therapy. A Cox regression model and competing risk analysis were used to evaluate the effects of convalescent plasma therapy on these patients. Results Twenty-six patients were in the convalescent plasma therapy group, and 78 patients were in the control group. Demographic characteristics were similar in both groups, except for the SOFA score. Convalescent plasma therapy did not improve 60-day mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.44, 95% CI 0.82–2.51, p = 0.20], but the SARS-CoV-2 negative conversion rate for 60 days after admission was higher in the convalescent plasma group (26.9 vs. 65.4%, p = 0.002) than in the control. Then, a competing risk analysis was performed, which considered events of interest (the negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2) and competing events (death) in the same model. Convalescent plasma therapy improved events of interest (p = 0.0002). Conclusion Convalescent plasma therapy could improve the SARS-CoV-2 negative conversion rate but could not improve 60-day mortality in patients with severe and life-threatening COVID-19 infection. Clinical Trial Number The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04616976).

[Management of immunocompromised renal transplant patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the treatment process of a renal transplant patient infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and discuss the management strategy for the immunocompromised hosts. METHODS: The diagnosis and treatment of a case of transplant patients with COVID-19 admitted to Horgos designated hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region in October 2021 were reviewed. The medical history and laboratory and imaging examination treatment and outcome of this case were analyzed. RESULTS: The recipient was a middle-aged male with a time from renal transplantation of 3 years. The onset was moderate to low fever, accompanied by cough and fatigue. Chest CT showed multiple ground glass shadows under the pleura of both lungs, mainly in both lower lungs, gradually worsening until "white lung" appeared, with early renal and cardiac insufficiency. In the course of treatment, immunosuppressants were reduced and the dosage of glucocorticoid was increased. In the early stage, due to renal insufficiency and hyperkalemia, dialysis was conducted for 3 times. Oral abidol and Lianhua Qingwen capsule were given as antiviral and anti-infection treatment. Special immunoglobulin and convalescent plasma of COVID-19 were used to boost the immunity of patients. The patient was eventually clinically cured. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical manifestations and diagnosis of COVID-19 for the kidney transplantation recipient are not significantly different from other populations, but immunocompromised hosts are more likely to suffer from organ dysfunction. The adjustment of immunosuppressants and glucocorticoids, respiratory support, selection of antibiotics, organ protection, nutritional support and traditional Chinese medicine intervention in the treatment of renal transplant recipients with severe COVID-19 need further discussion.

Efficacy and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody JS016 in Hospitalized Chinese Patients with COVID-19: a Phase 2/3, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Controlled Trial.

Recombinant human severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) monoclonal antibody JS016 showed neutralizing and therapeutic effects in preclinical studies. The clinical efficacy and safety of the therapy needed to be evaluated. In this phase 2/3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial, hospitalized patients with moderate or severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive standard care or standard care plus a single intravenous infusion of JS016. The primary outcome was a six-level ordinal scale of clinical status on day 28 since randomization. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, 28-day mortality, ventilator-free days within 28 days, length of hospital stay, and negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid on day 14. A total of 199 patients were randomized, and 197 (99 in the JS016 group and 98 in the control group) were analyzed. Most patients, 95 (96%) in the JS016 group and 97 (99%) in the control group were in the best category on day 28 since randomization. The odds ratio of being in a better clinical status was 0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 3.19; P = 0.33). Few adverse events occurred in both groups (3% in the JS016 group and 1% in the control group, respectively; P = 0.34). SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody JS016 did not show clinical efficacy among hospitalized Chinese patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease. Further studies are needed to assess the efficacy of the neutralizing antibody to prevent disease deterioration and its benefits among groups of patients specified by disease course and severity. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT04931238.).

Intravenous Immunoglobulin Therapy for Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients With Different Inflammatory Phenotypes: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study.

Background: The benefits of intravenous immunoglobulin administration are controversial for critically ill COVID-19 patients. Methods: We analyzed retrospectively the effects of immunoglobulin administration for critically ill COVID-19 patients. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with propensity score was used to account for baseline confounders. Cluster analysis was used to perform phenotype analysis. Results: Between January 1 and February 29, 2020, 754 patients with complete data from 19 hospitals were enrolled. Death at 28 days occurred for 408 (54.1%) patients. There were 392 (52.0%) patients who received intravenous immunoglobulin, at 11 (interquartile range (IQR) 8, 16) days after illness onset; 30% of these patients received intravenous immunoglobulin prior to intensive care unit (ICU) admission. By unadjusted analysis, no difference was observed for 28-day mortality between the immunoglobulin and non-immunoglobulin groups. Similar results were found by propensity score matching (n = 506) and by IPTW analysis (n = 731). Also, IPTW analysis did not reveal any significant difference between hyperinflammation and hypoinflammation phenotypes. Conclusion: No significant association was observed for use of intravenous immunoglobulin and decreased mortality of severe COVID-19 patients. Phenotype analysis did not show any survival benefit for patients who received immunoglobulin therapy.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 with hypotension in China: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The characteristics of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with hypotension are still limited. We aim to describe the clinical features and outcomes of the patients. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective study of critically ill patients with COVID-19 from ICUs in 19 hospitals in China. All patients were followed up to day 28 or death, which came first. Clinical and outcome data were collected and analyzed. Patients were classified as early-onset or late-onset hypotension, and clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 649 patients were included in the final analysis, and 240 (37.0%) were hypotension patients. The median age of hypotension patients was 67 years (IQR, 60-73 years), and 159 (66.2%) were male. 172 (71.7%) of the hypotension patients had at least one comorbidity. The 28-day mortality of the patients with hypotension was 85.4%, which was significantly higher than that of patients without hypotension. Compared with late-onset hypotension patients, the 28-day mortality of patients with early-onset hypotension was significantly higher (90.1% vs. 78.6%, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one third critically ill COVID-19 patients progressed to hypotension. The mortality was significantly higher in hypotension patients than that in patients without hypotension. Compared with patients with late-onset hypotension, the mortality of patients with early-onset hypotension was significantly higher.

A nomogram predicting severe COVID-19 based on a large study cohort from China.

BACKGROUND: The use of accurate prediction tools and early intervention are important for addressing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the prediction models for severe COVID-19 available to date are subject to various biases. This study aimed to construct a nomogram to provide accurate, personalized predictions of the risk of severe COVID-19. METHODS: This study was based on a large, multicenter retrospective derivation cohort and a validation cohort. The derivation cohort consisted of 496 patients from Jiangsu Province, China, between January 10, 2020, and March 15, 2020, and the validation cohort contained 105 patients from Huangshi, Hunan Province, China, between January 21, 2020, and February 29, 2020. A nomogram was developed with the selected predictors of severe COVID-19, which were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We evaluated the discrimination of the nomogram with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the calibration of the nomogram with calibration plots and Hosmer-Lemeshow tests. RESULTS: Three predictors, namely, age, lymphocyte count, and pulmonary opacity score, were selected to develop the nomogram. The nomogram exhibited good discrimination (AUC 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.96 in the derivation cohort; AUC 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.93 in the validation cohort) and satisfactory agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The nomogram was a reliable tool for assessing the probability of severe COVID-19 and may facilitate clinicians stratifying patients and providing early and optimal therapies.