MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200184680 · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000000588

Immunothrombosis Biomarkers for Distinguishing Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients From Noncoronavirus Disease Septic Patients With Pneumonia and for Predicting ICU Mortality

2021· article· en· W4200184680 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Explorations · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoLawson Health Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPneumoniaCoronavirusDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PathophysiologySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Respiratory disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Coronavirus disease 2019 patients have an increased risk of thrombotic complications that may reflect immunothrombosis, a process characterized by blood clotting, endothelial dysfunction, and the release of neutrophil extracellular traps. To date, few studies have investigated longitudinal changes in immunothrombosis biomarkers in these patients. Furthermore, how these longitudinal changes differ between coronavirus disease 2019 patients and noncoronavirus disease septic patients with pneumonia are unknown. OBJECTIVES: In this pilot observational study, we investigated the utility of immunothrombosis biomarkers for distinguishing between coronavirus disease 2019 patients and noncoronavirus disease septic patients with pneumonia. We also evaluated the utility of the biomarkers for predicting ICU mortality in these patients. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: = 14). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Nine biomarkers were measured from plasma samples (on days 1, 2, 4, 7, 10, and/or 14). Analysis was based on binomial logit models and receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: Cell-free DNA, d-dimer, soluble endothelial protein C receptor, protein C, soluble thrombomodulin, fibrinogen, citrullinated histones, and thrombin-antithrombin complexes have significant powers for distinguishing coronavirus disease 2019 patients from healthy individuals. In comparison, fibrinogen, soluble endothelial protein C receptor, antithrombin, and cell-free DNA have significant powers for distinguishing coronavirus disease 2019 from pneumonia patients. The predictors of ICU mortality differ between the two patient groups: soluble thrombomodulin and citrullinated histones for coronavirus disease 2019 patients, and protein C and cell-free DNA or fibrinogen for pneumonia patients. In both patient groups, the most recent biomarker values have stronger prognostic value than their ICU day 1 values. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Fibrinogen, soluble endothelial protein C receptor, antithrombin, and cell-free DNA have utility for distinguishing coronavirus disease 2019 patients from noncoronavirus disease septic patients with pneumonia. The most important predictors of ICU mortality are soluble thrombomodulin/citrullinated histones for coronavirus disease 2019 patients, and protein C/cell-free DNA for noncoronavirus disease pneumonia patients. This hypothesis-generating study suggests that the pathophysiology of immunothrombosis differs between the two patient groups.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care ExplorationsSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207