Internal and emergency medicine
-
This study aims to apply machine learning models to identify new biomarkers associated with the early diagnosis and prognosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Plasma and serum samples from COVID-19 patients (mild, moderate, and severe), patients with other pneumonia (but with negative COVID-19 RT-PCR), and healthy volunteers (control) from hospitals in four different countries (China, Spain, France, and Italy) were analyzed by GC-MS, LC-MS, and NMR. Machine learning models (PCA and PLS-DA) were developed to predict the diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 and identify biomarkers associated with these outcomes. ⋯ The PLS-DA model was able to predict the diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 around 95%. Additionally, our investigation pinpointed five novel potential biomarkers linked to the diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19: N-Acetyl-4-O-acetylneuraminic acid, N-Acetyl-L-Alanine, N-Acetyltriptophan, palmitoylcarnitine, and glycerol 1-myristate. These biomarkers exhibited heightened levels in severe COVID-19 patients compared to those with mild COVID-19 or healthy volunteers.
-
Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) have an increased risk of adverse events, including thromboembolism. In this analysis, we aimed to explore the association between DM and HFrEF using data from the "Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction" (WARCEF) trial. We analyzed factors associated with DM using multiple logistic regression models and evaluated the effect of DM on long-term prognosis, through adjusted Cox regressions. ⋯ Patients with DM had a higher risk of the primary composite outcome (Hazard Ratio [HR] and 95% Confidence Intervals [CI]: 1.48 [1.24-1.77]), as well as all-cause death (HR [95%CI]: 1.52 [1.25-1.84]). As in prior analyses, no statistically significant interaction was observed between DM and effect of Warfarin on the risk of the primary outcome, in any of the subgroups explored. In conclusion, we found that DM is common in HFrEF patients, and is associated with other cardiovascular comorbidities and risk factors, and with a worse prognosis.
-
To evaluate the prognostic stratification ability of 4C Mortality Score and COVID-19 Mortality Risk Score in different age groups. Retrospective study, including all patients, presented to the Emergency Department of the University Hospital Careggi, between February, 2020 and May, 2021, and admitted for SARS-CoV2. Patients were divided into four subgroups based on the quartiles of age distribution: patients < 57 years (G1, n = 546), 57-71 years (G2, n = 508), 72-81 years (G3, n = 552), and > 82 years (G4, n = 578). ⋯ Both scores were higher among non-survivors than survivors in all subgroups (4C-MS, G1: 6 [3-7] vs 3 [2-5]; G2: 10 [7-11] vs 7 [5-8]; G3: 11 [10-14] vs 10 [8-11]; G4: 13 [12-15] vs 11 [10-13], all p < 0.001; COVID-19 MRS, G1: 8 [7-9] vs 9 [9-11], G2: 10 [8-11] vs 11 [10-12]; G3: 11 [10-12] vs 12 [11-13]; G4: 11 [10-13] vs 13 [12-14], all p < 0.01). The ability of both scores to identify patients at higher risk of in-hospital mortality, was similar in different age groups (4C-MS: G1 0.77, G2 0.76, G3 0.68, G4 0.72; COVID-19 MRS: G1 0.67, G2 0.69, G3 0.69, G4 0.72, all p for comparisons between subgroups = NS). Both scores confirmed their good performance in predicting in-hospital mortality in all age groups, despite their different mortality rate.