Leveraging informative missing data to learn about acute respiratory distress syndrome and mortality in long-term hospitalized COVID-19 patients throughout the years of the pandemic (preprint)

Electronic health records (EHRs) contain a wealth of information that can be used to further precision health. One particular data element in EHRs that is not only under-utilized but oftentimes unaccounted for is missing data. However, missingness can provide valuable information about comorbidities and best practices for monitoring patients, which could save lives and reduce burden on the healthcare system. We characterize patterns of missing data in laboratory measurements collected at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital System from long-term COVID-19 patients and focus on the changes in these patterns between 2020 and 2021. We investigate how these patterns are associated with comorbidities such as acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and 90-day mortality in ARDS patients. This work displays how knowledge and experience can change the way clinicians and hospitals manage a novel disease. It can also provide insight into best practices when it comes to patient monitoring to improve outcomes.

Distinguishing Admissions Specifically for COVID-19 from Incidental SARS-CoV-2 Admissions: A National EHR Research Consortium Study (preprint)

Admissions are generally classified as COVID-19 hospitalizations if the patient has a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. However, because 35% of SARS-CoV-2 infections are asymptomatic, patients admitted for unrelated indications with an incidentally positive test could be misclassified as a COVID-19 hospitalization. EHR-based studies have been unable to distinguish between a hospitalization specifically for COVID-19 versus an incidental SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization. From a retrospective EHR-based cohort in four US healthcare systems, a random sample of 1,123 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients hospitalized between 3/2020-8/2021 was manually chart-reviewed and classified as admitted-with-COVID-19 (incidental) vs. specifically admitted for COVID-19 (for-COVID-19). EHR-based phenotyped feature sets filtered out incidental admissions, which occurred in 26%. The top site-specific feature sets had 79-99% specificity with 62-75% sensitivity, while the best performing across-site feature set had 71-94% specificity with 69-81% sensitivity. A large proportion of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive admissions were incidental. Straightforward EHR-based phenotypes differentiated admissions, which is important to assure accurate public health reporting and research.

SurvMaximin: Robust Federated Approach to Transporting Survival Risk Prediction Models (preprint)

ObjectiveFor multi-center heterogeneous Real-World Data (RWD) with time-to-event outcomes and high-dimensional features, we propose the SurvMaximin algorithm to estimate Cox model feature coefficients for a target population by borrowing summary information from a set of health care centers without sharing patient-level information. Materials and MethodsFor each of the centers from which we want to borrow information to improve the prediction performance for the target population, a penalized Cox model is fitted to estimate feature coefficients for the center. Using estimated feature coefficients and the covariance matrix of the target population, we then obtain a SurvMaximin estimated set of feature coefficients for the target population. The target population can be an entire cohort comprised of all centers, corresponding to federated learning, or can be a single center, corresponding to transfer learning. ResultsSimulation studies and a real-world international electronic health records application study, with 15 participating health care centers across three countries (France, Germany, and the U.S.), show that the proposed SurvMaximin algorithm achieves comparable or higher accuracy compared with the estimator using only the information of the target site and other existing methods. The SurvMaximin estimator is robust to variations in sample sizes and estimated feature coefficients between centers, which amounts to significantly improved estimates for target sites with fewer observations. ConclusionsThe SurvMaximin method is well suited for both federated and transfer learning in the high-dimensional survival analysis setting. SurvMaximin only requires a one-time summary information exchange from participating centers. Estimated regression vectors can be very heterogeneous. SurvMaximin provides robust Cox feature coefficient estimates without outcome information in the target population and is privacy-preserving.

Multinational Prevalence of Neurological Phenotypes in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 (preprint)

OBJECTIVE: Neurological complications can worsen outcomes in COVID-19. We defined the prevalence of a wide range of neurological conditions among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in geographically diverse multinational populations. METHODS: Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 348 participating hospitals across 6 countries and 3 continents between January and September 2020, we performed a cross-sectional study of hospitalized adult and pediatric patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test, both with and without severe COVID-19. We assessed the frequency of each disease category and 3-character International Classification of Disease (ICD) code of neurological diseases by countries, sites, time before and after admission for COVID-19, and COVID-19 severity. RESULTS: Among the 35,177 hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, there was increased prevalence of disorders of consciousness (5.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.7%-7.8%, pFDR

International Comparisons of Harmonized Laboratory Value Trajectories to Predict Severe COVID-19: Leveraging the 4CE Collaborative Across 342 Hospitals and 6 Countries: A Retrospective Cohort Study (preprint)

Objectives: To perform an international comparison of the trajectory of laboratory values among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who develop severe disease and identify optimal timing of laboratory value collection to predict severity across hospitals and regions. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: The Consortium for Clinical Characterization of COVID-19 by EHR (4CE), an international multi-site data-sharing collaborative of 342 hospitals in the US and in Europe. Participants: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19, admitted before or after PCR-confirmed result for SARS-CoV-2. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Patients were categorized as ''ever-severe'' or ''never-severe'' using the validated 4CE severity criteria. Eighteen laboratory tests associated with poor COVID-19-related outcomes were evaluated for predictive accuracy by area under the curve (AUC), compared between the severity categories. Subgroup analysis was performed to validate a subset of laboratory values as predictive of severity against a published algorithm. A subset of laboratory values (CRP, albumin, LDH, neutrophil count, D-dimer, and procalcitonin) was compared between North American and European sites for severity prediction. Results: Of 36,447 patients with COVID-19, 19,953 (43.7%) were categorized as ever-severe. Most patients (78.7%) were 50 years of age or older and male (60.5%). Longitudinal trajectories of CRP, albumin, LDH, neutrophil count, D-dimer, and procalcitonin showed association with disease severity. Significant differences of laboratory values at admission were found between the two groups. With the exception of D-dimer, predictive discrimination of laboratory values did not improve after admission. Sub-group analysis using age, D-dimer, CRP, and lymphocyte count as predictive of severity at admission showed similar discrimination to a published algorithm (AUC=0.88 and 0.91, respectively). Both models deteriorated in predictive accuracy as the disease progressed. On average, no difference in severity prediction was found between North American and European sites. Conclusions: Laboratory test values at admission can be used to predict severity in patients with COVID-19. There is a need for prediction models that will perform well over the course of the disease in hospitalized patients.

Validation of a Derived International Patient Severity Phenotype to Support COVID-19 Analytics from Electronic Health Record Data (preprint)

Introduction. The Consortium for Clinical Characterization of COVID-19 by EHR (4CE) includes hundreds of hospitals internationally using a federated computational approach to COVID-19 research using the EHR. Objective. We sought to develop and validate a standard definition of COVID-19 severity from readily accessible EHR data across the Consortium. Methods. We developed an EHR-based severity algorithm and validated it on patient hospitalization data from 12 4CE clinical sites against the outcomes of ICU admission and/or death. We also used a machine learning approach to compare selected predictors of severity to the 4CE algorithm at one site. Results. The 4CE severity algorithm performed with pooled sensitivity of 0.73 and specificity 0.83 for the combined outcome of ICU admission and/or death. The sensitivity of single code categories for acuity were unacceptably inaccurate - varying by up to 0.65 across sites. A multivariate machine learning approach identified codes resulting in mean AUC 0.956 (95% CI: 0.952, 0.959) compared to 0.903 (95% CI: 0.886, 0.921) using expert-derived codes. Billing codes were poor proxies of ICU admission, with 49% precision and recall compared against chart review at one partner institution. Discussion. We developed a proxy measure of severity that proved resilient to coding variability internationally by using a set of 6 code classes. In contrast, machine-learning approaches may tend to overfit hospital-specific orders. Manual chart review revealed discrepancies even in the gold standard outcomes, possibly due to pandemic conditions. Conclusion. We developed an EHR-based algorithm for COVID-19 severity and validated it at 12 international sites.

Identifying zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2 by modeling the binding affinity between Spike receptor-binding domain and host ACE2 (preprint)

Despite considerable research progress on SARS-CoV-2, the direct zoonotic origin (intermediate host) of the virus remains ambiguous. The most definitive approach to identify the intermediate host would be the detection of SARS-CoV-2-like coronaviruses in wild animals. However, due to the high number of animal species, it is not feasible to screen all the species in the laboratory. Given that the recognition of the binding ACE2 proteins is the first step for the coronaviruses to invade host cells, we proposed a computational pipeline to identify potential intermediate hosts of SARS-CoV-2 by modeling the binding affinity between the Spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) and host ACE2. Using this pipeline, we systematically examined 285 ACE2 variants from mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and amphibians, and found that the binding energies calculated on the modeled Spike-RBD/ACE2 complex structures correlate closely with the effectiveness of animal infections as determined by multiple experimental datasets. Built on the optimized binding affinity cutoff, we suggested a set of 96 mammals, including 48 experimentally investigated ones, which are permissive to SARS-CoV-2, with candidates from primates, rodents, and carnivores at the highest risk of infection. Overall, this work not only suggested a limited range of potential intermediate SARS-CoV-2 hosts for further experimental investigation; but more importantly, it proposed a new structure-based approach to general zoonotic origin and susceptibility analyses that are critical for human infectious disease control and wildlife protection.

Ontology-based systematic classification and analysis of coronaviruses, hosts, and host-coronavirus interactions towards deep understanding of COVID-19 (preprint)

Given the existing COVID-19 pandemic worldwide, it is critical to systematically study the interactions between hosts and coronaviruses including SARS-Cov, MERS-Cov, and SARS-CoV-2 (cause of COVID-19). We first created four host-pathogen interaction (HPI)-Outcome postulates, and generated a HPI-Outcome model as the basis for understanding host-coronavirus interactions (HCI) and their relations with the disease outcomes. We hypothesized that ontology can be used as an integrative platform to classify and analyze HCI and disease outcomes. Accordingly, we annotated and categorized different coronaviruses, hosts, and phenotypes using ontologies and identified their relations. Various COVID-19 phenotypes are hypothesized to be caused by the backend HCI mechanisms. To further identify the causal HCI-outcome relations, we collected 35 experimentally-verified HCI protein-protein interactions (PPIs), and applied literature mining to identify additional host PPIs in response to coronavirus infections. The results were formulated in a logical ontology representation for integrative HCI-outcome understanding. Using known PPIs as baits, we also developed and applied a domain-inferred prediction method to predict new PPIs and identified their pathological targets on multiple organs. Overall, our proposed ontology-based integrative framework combined with computational predictions can be used to support fundamental understanding of the intricate interactions between human patients and coronaviruses (including SARS-CoV-2) and their association with various disease outcomes.

International Electronic Health Record-Derived COVID-19 Clinical Course Profile: The 4CE Consortium (preprint)

We leveraged the largely untapped resource of electronic health record data to address critical clinical and epidemiological questions about Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). To do this, we formed an international consortium (4CE) of 96 hospitals across 5 countries (www.covidclinical.net). Contributors utilized the Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside (i2b2) or Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) platforms to map to a common data model. The group focused on comorbidities and temporal changes in key laboratory test values. Harmonized data were analyzed locally and converted to a shared aggregate form for rapid analysis and visualization of regional differences and global commonalities. Data covered 27,584 COVID-19 cases with 187,802 laboratory tests. Case counts and laboratory trajectories were concordant with existing literature. Laboratory tests at the time of diagnosis showed hospital-level differences equivalent to country-level variation across the consortium partners. Despite the limitations of decentralized data generation, we established a framework to capture the trajectory of COVID-19 disease in patients and their response to interventions.