MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092949602 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2020.10.008

Admission High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin vs a Biochemical Score for Predicting Mortality in Patients With COVID-19

2020· article· en· W3092949602 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Peter A. Kavsak, Shawn Mondoux, Kerstin de Wit, Bram Rochwerg, Cheryl Main, Deborah Yamamura, Guillaume Paré, Jinhui Ma, Dan Perri, Jonathan Sherbino, Andrew Worster

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsInternal medicineMedicineTroponinRenal functionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CardiologyEmergency departmentCreatininePopulationMyocardial infarctionDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging evidence indicates a role for cardiac troponin testing, specifically high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).1Kavsak P.A. Hammarsten O. Worster A. Smith S.W. Apple F.S. Cardiac troponin testing in patients with COVID-19: a strategy for testing and reporting results [e-pub ahead of print]. Clin Chem.https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvaa225Google Scholar Undetectable levels of hs-cTn in patients with (and without) COVID-19 may be helpful in identifying a low-risk subgroup, with higher levels useful in identifying patients at high-risk for hospital death.1Kavsak P.A. Hammarsten O. Worster A. Smith S.W. Apple F.S. Cardiac troponin testing in patients with COVID-19: a strategy for testing and reporting results [e-pub ahead of print]. Clin Chem.https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvaa225Google Scholar,2Kavsak P.A. Cerasuolo J.O. Ko D.T. et al.High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I vs a clinical chemistry score for predicting all-cause mortality in an emergency department population.CJC Open. 2020; 2: 296-302Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar Further improvements in risk-stratification for emergency department or hospitalized patients may be achieved by adding clinical chemistry tests, such as glucose and creatinine (ie, estimated glomerular filtration rate), to generate a clinical chemistry score (CCS).2Kavsak P.A. Cerasuolo J.O. Ko D.T. et al.High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I vs a clinical chemistry score for predicting all-cause mortality in an emergency department population.CJC Open. 2020; 2: 296-302Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar,3Kavsak P.A. Cerasuolo J.O. Mondoux S.E. et al.Risk stratification for patients with chest pain discharged home from the emergency department.J Clin Med. 2020; 9: E2948Crossref PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar For patients with COVID-19, additional biochemical tests may have important prognostic roles—for example, urea level, which is already a component of the CURB-65 score (confusion, urea, respiratory rate, blood pressure, age ≥ 65 years) used to risk stratify patients presenting to the hospital with pneumonia.4Kavsak P.A. de Wit K. Worster A. Emerging key laboratory tests for patients with COVID-19.Clin Biochem. 2020; 81: 13-14Crossref PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar We performed a retrospective chart review of COVID-19 patients admitted to hospitals in the city of Hamilton in order to explore the performance characteristics of hs-cTn levels, the CCS, and the CCS with urea (CCUS) to predict in-hospital death. This review included the first 26 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic (ethics approval: #11425-C). From March 16, 2020 to September 10, 2020, we identified 147 patients who were hospitalized at the Hamilton General Hospital, Juravinski Hospital, or St. Joseph’s Healthcare, Hamilton with reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (performed at the Hamilton regional laboratory medicine program; HRLMP). Of these 147 patients (3 still hospitalized), 48 (median age = 80 years) did not have hs-cTnI tests (Abbott [Chicago, IL] or Ortho Diagnostics [Raritan, NJ]), with an additional 40 without admission hs-cTnI measurement, leaving only 39 patients (median age = 72 years; 64% male; n = 13 deaths) with measures of admission hs-cTnI level, glucose level, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and urea level (P = 0.05 for age between groups). We calculated the CCS as has previously been described, with points ranging from 0 to 5.2Kavsak P.A. Cerasuolo J.O. Ko D.T. et al.High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I vs a clinical chemistry score for predicting all-cause mortality in an emergency department population.CJC Open. 2020; 2: 296-302Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar The CCUS includes the CCS with an additional point of 1 assigned if the urea level was > 7 mmol/L (0 if below), thus yielding a range of 0-6 points.2Kavsak P.A. Cerasuolo J.O. Ko D.T. et al.High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I vs a clinical chemistry score for predicting all-cause mortality in an emergency department population.CJC Open. 2020; 2: 296-302Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar, 3Kavsak P.A. Cerasuolo J.O. Mondoux S.E. et al.Risk stratification for patients with chest pain discharged home from the emergency department.J Clin Med. 2020; 9: E2948Crossref PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar, 4Kavsak P.A. de Wit K. Worster A. Emerging key laboratory tests for patients with COVID-19.Clin Biochem. 2020; 81: 13-14Crossref PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar As 2 different hs-cTnI assays (Abbott = 29 patients; Ortho = 10 patients) were used, we divided the results by the respective upper reference limits to normalize for analyses. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses with the areas under the curve, and sensitivity and specificity estimates for in-hospital death, were performed. The CCUS had the highest area under the curve for in-hospital death (0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.92), higher than for hs-cTnI alone (0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.83; P = 0.01; Fig. 1). A CCUS ≤ 2 yielded a sensitivity = 92% (95% CI: 64-99) and a CCUS > 5 yielded a specificity = 92% (95% CI: 74-99). Major limitations include a small sample size and issues related to patient selection. This proof-of-principle study suggests that the prognostic performance of the hs-cTn level in patients with COVID-19 might be improved by the addition of routine biochemical tests. The Hamilton integrated research ethics board approved this study: #11425-C. This work received funding from a Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant (PK, funding reference #155964).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207