Sex-Dependent Performance of the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte, Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte, Platelet-to-Lymphocyte and Mean Platelet Volume-to-Platelet Ratios in Discriminating COVID-19 Severity.

Background: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), and mean platelet volume-to-platelet ratio (MPR) are combined hematology tests that predict COVID-19 severity, although with different cut-off values. Because sex significantly impacts immune responses and the course of COVID-19, the ratios could be biased by sex. Purpose: This study aims to evaluate sex-dependent differences in the contribution of NLR, PLR, MLR, and MPR to COVID-19 severity and mortality upon hospital admission using a sample of pneumonia patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This single-center observational cross-sectional study included 3,280 confirmed COVID-19 cases (CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus real-time RT-PCR Diagnostic) from Quito (Ecuador). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to identify optimal cut-offs of the above parameters when discriminating severe COVID-19 pneumonia and mortality risks after segregation by sex. Severe COVID-19 pneumonia was defined as having PaO2 < 60 mmHg and SpO2 < 94%, whereas non-severe COVID-19 pneumonia was defined as having PaO2 ≥ 60 mmHg and SpO2 ≥ 94%. Results: The mortality rate of COVID-19 among men was double that in women. Severe COVID-19 pneumonia and non-surviving patients had a higher level of NLR, MLR, PLR, and MPR. The medians of NLR, MLR, and MPR in men were significantly higher, but PLR was not different between men and women. In men, these ratios had lower cut-offs than in women (NLR: 2.42 vs. 3.31, MLR: 0.24 vs. 0.35, and PLR: 83.9 vs. 151.9). The sensitivity of NLR, MLR, and PLR to predict pneumonia severity was better in men (69-77%), whereas their specificity was enhanced in women compared to men (70-76% vs. 23-48%). Conclusion: These ratios may represent widely available biomarkers in COVID-19 since they were significant predictors for disease severity and mortality although with different performances in men and women.

Biomarkers of severe COVID-19 pneumonia on admission using data-mining powered by common laboratory blood tests-datasets.

In the epidemiological COVID-19 research, artificial intelligence is a unique approach to make predictions about disease severity to manage COVID-19 patients. A limitation of artificial intelligence is, however, the high risk of bias. We investigated the skill of data mining and machine learning, two advanced forms of artificial intelligence, to predict severe COVID-19 pneumonia based on routine laboratory tests. A sample of 4009 COVID-19 patients was divided into Severe (PaO2< 60 mmHg, 489 cases) and Non-Severe (PaO2 ≥ 60 mmHg, 3520 cases) groups according to blood hypoxemia on admission and their laboratory datasets analyzed by the R software and WEKA workbench. After curation, data were processed for the selection of the most influential features including hemogram, pCO2, blood acid-base balance, prothrombin time, inflammation biomarkers, and glucose. The best fit of variables was successfully confirmed by either the Multilayer Perceptron, a feedforward neural network algorithm that performed machine recognition of severe COVID-19 with 96.5% precision, or by the C4.5 software, a supervised learning algorithm based on an objective-predefined variable (severity) that generated a decision tree with 89.4% precision. Finally, a complex bivariate Pearson's correlation matrix combined with advanced hierarchical clustering (dendrograms) were conducted for knowledge discovery. The hidden structure of the datasets revealed shift patterns related to the development of COVID-19-induced pneumonia that involved the lymphocyte-to-C-reactive protein and leukocyte-to-C-protein ratios, neutrophil %, pH and pCO2. The data mining approaches to the hematological fluctuations associated with severe COVID-19 pneumonia could not only anticipate adverse clinical outcomes, but also reveal putative therapeutic targets.

Comparison between RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 and expanded triage in sputum of symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 subjects in Ecuador.

BACKGROUND: The quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) effectively detects the SARS-COV-2 virus. SARS-CoV-2 Nevertheless, some critical gaps remain in the identification and monitoring of asymptomatic people. METHODS: This retrospective study included 733 asymptomatic and symptomatic COVID-19 subjects, who were submitted to the RT-qPCR test. The objective was to assess the efficacy of an expanded triage of subjects undergoing the RT-qPCR test for SARS-COV-2 to identify the largest possible number of COVID-19 cases in a hospital setting in Ecuador. SARS-CoV-2 Firstly, the sensitivity and specificity as well as the predictive values of an expanded triage method were calculated. In addition, the Kappa coefficient was also determined to assess the concordance between laboratory test results and the expanded triage. RESULTS: Of a total of 733 sputum samples; 229 were RT-qPCR-positive (31.2%) and mortality rate reached 1.2%. Overall sensitivity and specificity were 86.0% (95% confidence interval: 81.0-90.0%) and 37.0% (95% confidence interval: 32.0-41.0%) respectively, with a diagnostic accuracy of 52.0% and a Kappa coefficient of 0.73. An association between the positivity of the test and its performance before 10 days was found. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical sensitivity for COVID-19 detection was within acceptable standards, but the specificity still fell below the values of reference. The lack of symptoms did not always mean to have a negative SARS-COV-2 RT-qPCR test. The expanded triage identified a still unnoticed percentage of asymptomatic subjects showing positive results for the SARS-COV-2 RT-qPCR test. The study also revealed a significant relationship between the number of RT-qPCR-positive cases and the performance of the molecular diagnosis within the first 10 days of COVID-19 in the symptomatic group.