Identifying Immunological and Clinical Predictors of COVID-19 Severity and Sequelae by Mathematical Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
several predictive models, using specific clinical or biochemical parameters. In the current study, we developed an integrative non-linear predictive model of COVID-19 outcome, using clinical, biochemical, immunological, and radiological data of patients with different disease severities. Initially, the immunological signature of the disease was investigated through transcriptomics analysis of nasopharyngeal swab samples of patients with different COVID-19 severity versus control subjects (exploratory cohort, n=61), identifying significant differential expression of several cytokines. Accordingly, 24 cytokines were validated using a multiplex assay in the serum of COVID-19 patients and control subjects (validation cohort, n=77). Predictors of severity were Interleukin (IL)-10, Programmed Death-Ligand-1 (PDL-1), Tumor necrosis factors-α, absolute neutrophil count, C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, blood urea nitrogen, and ferritin; with high predictive efficacy (AUC=0.93 and 0.98 using ROC analysis of the predictive capacity of cytokines and biochemical markers, respectively). Increased IL-6 and granzyme B were found to predict liver injury in COVID-19 patients, whereas interferon-gamma (IFN-γ), IL-1 receptor-a (IL-1Ra) and PD-L1 were predictors of remarkable radiological findings. The model revealed consistent elevation of IL-15 and IL-10 in severe cases. Combining basic biochemical and radiological investigations with a limited number of curated cytokines will likely attain accurate predictive value in COVID-19. The model-derived cytokines highlight critical pathways in the pathophysiology of the COVID-19 with insight towards potential therapeutic targets. Our modeling methodology can be implemented using new datasets to identify key players and predict outcomes in new variants of COVID-19.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".