ABSTRACT: Early prediction of COVID-19 in-hospital mortality relies usually on patients' preexisting comorbidities and is rarely reproducible in independent cohorts. We wanted to compare the role of routinely measured biomarkers of immunity, inflammation, and cellular damage with preexisting comorbidities in eight different machine-learning models to predict mortality, and evaluate their performance in an independent population. We recruited and followed-up consecutive adult patients with SARS-Cov-2 infection in two different Italian hospitals. We predicted 60-day mortality in one cohort (development dataset, n = 299 patients, of which 80% was allocated to the development dataset and 20% to the training set) and retested the models in the second cohort (external validation dataset, n = 402). Demographic, clinical, and laboratory features at admission, treatments and disease outcomes were significantly different between the two cohorts. Notably, significant differences were observed for %lymphocytes (p < 0.05), international-normalized-ratio (p < 0.01), platelets, alanine-aminotransferase, creatinine (all p < 0.001). The primary outcome (60-day mortality) was 29.10% (n = 87) in the development dataset, and 39.55% (n = 159) in the external validation dataset. The performance of the 8 tested models on the external validation dataset were similar to that of the holdout test dataset, indicating that the models capture the key predictors of mortality. The shap analysis in both datasets showed that age, immune features (%lymphocytes, platelets) and LDH substantially impacted on all models' predictions, while creatinine and CRP varied among the different models. The model with the better performance was model 8 (60-day mortality AUROC 0.83 ± 0.06 in holdout test set, 0.79 ± 0.02 in external validation dataset). The features that had the greatest impact on this model's prediction were age, LDH, platelets, and %lymphocytes, more than comorbidities or inflammation markers, and these findings were highly consistent in both datasets, likely reflecting the virus effect at the very beginning of the disease.
