Dataset Information

Development and Internal Validation of a New Prognostic Model Powered to Predict 28-Day All-Cause Mortality in ICU COVID-19 Patients—The COVID-SOFA Score

ABSTRACT: Background: The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score has poor discriminative ability for death in severely or critically ill patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Our aim was to create a new score powered to predict 28-day mortality. Methods: Retrospective, observational, bicentric cohort study including 425 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, acute respiratory failure and SOFA score ≥ 2 requiring ICU admission for ≥72 h. Factors with independent predictive value for 28-day mortality were identified after stepwise Cox proportional hazards (PH) regression. Based on the regression coefficients, an equation was computed representing the COVID-SOFA score. Discriminative ability was tested using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, concordance statistics and precision-recall curves. This score was internally validated. Results: Median (Q1–Q3) age for the whole sample was 64 [55–72], with 290 (68.2%) of patients being male. The 28-day mortality was 54.58%. After stepwise Cox PH regression, age, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and SOFA score remained in the final model. The following equation was computed: COVID-SOFA score = 10 × [0.037 × Age + 0.347 × ln(NLR) + 0.16 × SOFA]. Harrell’s C-index for the COVID-SOFA score was higher than the SOFA score alone for 28-day mortality (0.697 [95% CI; 0.662–0.731] versus 0.639 [95% CI: 0.605–0.672]). Subsequently, the prediction error rate was improved up to 16.06%. Area under the ROC (AUROC) was significantly higher for the COVID-SOFA score compared with the SOFA score for 28-day mortality: 0.796 [95% CI: 0.755–0.833] versus 0.699 [95% CI: 0.653–0.742, p < 0.001]. Better predictive value was observed with repeated measurement at 48 h after ICU admission. Conclusions: The COVID-SOFA score is better than the SOFA score alone for 28-day mortality prediction. Improvement in predictive value seen with measurements at 48 h after ICU admission suggests that the COVID-SOFA score can be used in a repetitive manner. External validation is required to support these results.

SUBMITTER: Moisa E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9323813 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimThe efficacy of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score as predictor of clinical outcomes among ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients is still controversial. We aimed to assess whether SOFA-score in different time intervals could predict 28-day mortality compared with other well-acknowledged risk factors of COVID-19 mortality.MethodsThis observational prospective cohort was conducted on 1057 patients from March 2020 to March 2022 at Masih Daneshvari Hospital, Iran. The univariate and multivariate Cox proportional analysis were performed to assess the hazards of SOFA-score models. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were designed to estimate the predictive values.ResultsMean SOFA-score during first 96 h (HR: 3.82 [CI: 2.75-5.31]), highest SOFA-score (HR: 2.70 [CI: 1.93-3.78]), and initial SOFA-score (HR: 1.65 [CI: 1.30-2.11]) had strongest association with 28-day mortality (p < .0001). In contrast, SOFA scores at 48 and 96 h as well as Δ-SOFA: 48-0 h and Δ-SOFA: 96-0 h did not show significant correlations. Among them, merely mean SOFA-score (HR: 2.28 [CI: 2.21-3.51]; p < .001) remained as independent prognosticator on multivariate regression analysis; though having less odds of predicting value compared with age (HR: 3.81 [CI: 1.98-5.21]), hypertension (HR: 3.11 [CI: 1.26-3.81]), coronary artery disease [CAD] (HR: 2.82 [CI: 1.51-4.8]), and diabetes mellitus (HR: 2.45 [CI: 1.36-2.99]). The area under ROC (AUROC) for mean SOFA-score (0.77) and highest SOFA-score (0.71) were larger than other SOFA intervals. Calculating the first 96 h of SOFA trends, it was obtained that fatality rate was <12.3% if the score dropped, between 28.8% and 46.29% if the score remained unchanged, and >50.45% if the score increased.ConclusionTo predict the 28-day mortality among ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients, mean SOFA upon first 96 h of ICU stay is reliable; while having inadequate accuracy comparing with well-acknowledged COVID-19 mortality predictors (age, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, CAD). Notably, increased SOFA levels in the course of first 96 h of ICU-admission, prognosticate at least 50% fatality regardless of initial SOFA score.

Project description:BackgroundThe Sepsis-3 criteria introduced the system that uses the Sequential Organ-Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to define sepsis. The cardiovascular SOFA (CV SOFA) scoring system needs modification due to the change in guideline-recommended vasopressors. In this study, we aimed to develop and to validate the modified CV SOFA score.MethodsWe developed, internally validated, and externally validated the modified CV SOFA score using the suspected infection cohort, sepsis cohort, and septic shock cohort. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The modified CV SOFA score system was constructed with consideration of the recently recommended use of the vasopressor norepinephrine with or without lactate level. The predictive validity of the modified SOFA score was evaluated by the discrimination for the primary outcome. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed using the calibration curve. We compared the prognostic performance of the original CV/total SOFA score and the modified CV/total SOFA score to detect mortality in patients with suspected infection, sepsis, or septic shock.ResultsWe identified 7,393 patients in the suspected cohort, 4038 patients in the sepsis cohort, and 3,107 patients in the septic shock cohort in seven Korean emergency departments (EDs). The 28-day mortality rates were 7.9%, 21.4%, and 20.5%, respectively, in the suspected infection, sepsis, and septic shock cohorts. The model performance is higher when vasopressor and lactate were used in combination than the vasopressor only used model. The modified CV/total SOFA score was well-developed and internally and externally validated in terms of discrimination and calibration. Predictive validity of the modified CV SOFA was significantly higher than that of the original CV SOFA in the development set (0.682 vs 0.624, p < 0.001), test set (0.716 vs 0.638), and all other cohorts (0.648 vs 0.557, 0.674 vs 0.589). Calibration was modest. In the suspected infection cohort, the modified model classified more patients to sepsis (66.0 vs 62.5%) and identified more patients at risk of septic mortality than the SOFA score (92.6 vs 89.5%).ConclusionsAmong ED patients with suspected infection, sepsis, and septic shock, the newly-developed modified CV/total SOFA score had higher predictive validity and identified more patients at risk of septic mortality.

Project description:BackgroundHigh prevalence of malnutrition was found in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score is frequently used for nutritional risk assessment in intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of mNUTRIC score to predict 28-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU.MethodsA cohort of consecutive COVID-19 critically ill patients admitted to ICU was retrospectively evaluated and the nutritional risk was assessed with the use of mNUTRIC score. A multivariable Cox regression model to predict 28-day mortality was therefore developed including the mNUTRIC as a covariate. Internal validation was performed using the bootstrap resampling technique to reduce possible bias in the estimated risks. The performance of the prediction model was assessed via calibration and discrimination.ResultsA total of 98 critically ill COVID-19 patients with a median age of 66 years (56-73 IQR), 81 (82.7%) males were included in this study. A high nutritional risk (mNUTRIC ≥5 points) was observed in 41.8% of our critically ill COVID-19 patients while a low nutritional risk (mNUTRIC <5 points) was observed in 58.2%. Forty-five patients (45.9%) died within 28 days after ICU admission. In multivariable model after internal validation, mNUTRIC ≥5 (optimism adjusted HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.08-5.25, p = 0.02) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein values (CRP) (optimism adjusted HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.07, p = 0.005) were independent predictors of 28-day mortality.ConclusionsA high prevalence of malnutrition as revealed by mNUTRIC was found in our critically ill COVID-19 patients once admitted in ICU. After adjustment for covariables, mNUTRIC ≥5 and CRP levels were independently associated with 28-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The final model revealed good discrimination and calibration. Nutritional risk assessment is essential for the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients as well as for outcome prediction.

Project description:The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, also known as SOFA score, was introduced to assess organ dysfunction of critical ill patients. However, understanding the impact of missing SOFA scores in randomized controlled trials and how this affect the validity and applicability of the SOFA score as a surrogate endpoint for predicting mortality has been a matter of interest. To address this, a secondary analysis of a systematic review was conducted to quantify the relationship between SOFA scores and the prediction of mortality in critically ill adults in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The systematic review being referred to included 87 RCTs with a total of 12,064 critically ill patients. This analysis focused on missing SOFA score data in relation to the length of stay on the intensive care unit (ICU) and the methods used to handle missing data. SOFA score measurements from the included studies were categorized into three time frames: Early (t ≤ 4 days), Intermediate (t = 5-10 days) and Late (t > 10 days) measurement. Only one study reported a complete data set for calculating the SOFA score for an Early measurement. When considering all methods used to address missing data, 32% of studies still had missing data for Early measurements, and this percentage increased to 64% for Late measurements. These findings suggested that, over time, the number of studies with incomplete data sets has been increasing. The longer a patient is treated on the ICU, the higher the number of missing data which can impact the validity of SOFA score analyses. There was no clear trend towards a specific method for compensating missing data. An exemplary calculation demonstrated that ignoring missing data may lead to an underestimated variability of the treatment effect. This, in turn, could bias the interpretation of study results by policy- and clinical decision-makers. Overall, there are several limitations that need to be considered when using SOFA score as a surrogate endpoint for mortality. When employed as an outcome, the SOFA score is frequently missing and most studies do not adequately describe the amount or nature of missing data, or the methods used to handle missing data in the analysis.

Dataset Information

Development and Internal Validation of a New Prognostic Model Powered to Predict 28-Day All-Cause Mortality in ICU COVID-19 Patients—The COVID-SOFA Score

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets