Development and validation of the MMCD score to predict kidney replacement therapy in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is frequently associated with COVID-19, and the need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is considered an indicator of disease severity. This study aimed to develop a prognostic score for predicting the need for KRT in hospitalised COVID-19 patients, and to assess the incidence of AKI and KRT requirement. METHODS: This study is part of a multicentre cohort, the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry. A total of 5212 adult COVID-19 patients were included between March/2020 and September/2020. Variable selection was performed using generalised additive models (GAM), and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was used for score derivation. Accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC). RESULTS: The median age of the model-derivation cohort was 59 (IQR 47-70) years, 54.5% were men, 34.3% required ICU admission, 20.9% evolved with AKI, 9.3% required KRT, and 15.1% died during hospitalisation. The temporal validation cohort had similar age, sex, ICU admission, AKI, required KRT distribution and in-hospital mortality. The geographic validation cohort had similar age and sex; however, this cohort had higher rates of ICU admission, AKI, need for KRT and in-hospital mortality. Four predictors of the need for KRT were identified using GAM: need for mechanical ventilation, male sex, higher creatinine at hospital presentation and diabetes. The MMCD score had excellent discrimination in derivation (AUROC 0.929, 95% CI 0.918-0.939) and validation (temporal AUROC 0.927, 95% CI 0.911-0.941; geographic AUROC 0.819, 95% CI 0.792-0.845) cohorts and good overall performance (Brier score: 0.057, 0.056 and 0.122, respectively). The score is implemented in a freely available online risk calculator ( https://www.mmcdscore.com/ ). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the MMCD score to predict the need for KRT may assist healthcare workers in identifying hospitalised COVID-19 patients who may require more intensive monitoring, and can be useful for resource allocation.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation outcomes in COVID-19 patients: Case series from the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry.

Around 5% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients develop critical disease, with severe pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In these cases, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may be considered when conventional therapy fails. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 patients with ARDS refractory to lung-protective ventilation and prone positioning on ECMO support, as well as to review the available literature on ECMO use and COVID-19 patients' outcome. Patients from this case series were selected from the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry. From the 7646 patients included in the registry, only eight received ECMO support (0.1%), in four hospitals. The median age of the entire sample was 59 (interquartile range 54.2-64.4) years old and 87.5% were male. Hypertension (50.0%), diabetes mellitus (50.0%) and obesity (37.5%) were the most frequent comorbidities. The indications for ECMO were PaO2 /FiO2 ratio <80 mm Hg for more than 6 h or PaO2 /FiO2 ratio <60 mm Hg for more than 3 h. The mortality rate was 87.5%. In conclusion, in this case series of COVID-19 patients with ARDS refractory to conventional therapy who received ECMO support, a very high mortality was observed. Our findings are not different from previous studies including a small number of patients; however, there is a huge difference from Extracorporeal Life Support Organization results, which encourages us to keep looking for improvement.

Potential and limitations of machine meta-learning (ensemble) methods for predicting COVID-19 mortality in a large inhospital Brazilian dataset.

The majority of early prediction scores and methods to predict COVID-19 mortality are bound by methodological flaws and technological limitations (e.g., the use of a single prediction model). Our aim is to provide a thorough comparative study that tackles those methodological issues, considering multiple techniques to build mortality prediction models, including modern machine learning (neural) algorithms and traditional statistical techniques, as well as meta-learning (ensemble) approaches. This study used a dataset from a multicenter cohort of 10,897 adult Brazilian COVID-19 patients, admitted from March/2020 to November/2021, including patients [median age 60 (interquartile range 48-71), 46% women]. We also proposed new original population-based meta-features that have not been devised in the literature. Stacking has shown to achieve the best results reported in the literature for the death prediction task, improving over previous state-of-the-art by more than 46% in Recall for predicting death, with AUROC 0.826 and MacroF1 of 65.4%. The newly proposed meta-features were highly discriminative of death, but fell short in producing large improvements in final prediction performance, demonstrating that we are possibly on the limits of the prediction capabilities that can be achieved with the current set of ML techniques and (meta-)features. Finally, we investigated how the trained models perform on different hospitals, showing that there are indeed large differences in classifier performance between different hospitals, further making the case that errors are produced by factors that cannot be modeled with the current predictors.

Chagas disease and SARS-CoV-2 coinfection does not lead to worse in-hospital outcomes.

Chagas disease (CD) continues to be a major public health burden in Latina America. Information on the interplay between COVID-19 and CD is lacking. Our aim was to assess clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients with CD and COVID-19, and to compare it to non-CD patients. Consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included from March to September 2020. Genetic matching for sex, age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hospital was performed in a 4:1 ratio. Of the 7018 patients who had confirmed COVID-19, 31 patients with CD and 124 matched controls were included (median age 72 (64-80) years-old, 44.5% were male). At baseline, heart failure (25.8% vs. 9.7%) and atrial fibrillation (29.0% vs. 5.6%) were more frequent in CD patients than in the controls (p < 0.05). C-reactive protein levels were lower in CD patients compared with the controls (55.5 [35.7, 85.0] vs. 94.3 [50.7, 167.5] mg/dL). In-hospital management, outcomes and complications were similar between the groups. In this large Brazilian COVID-19 Registry, CD patients had a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation and chronic heart failure compared with non-CD controls, with no differences in-hospital outcomes. The lower C-reactive protein levels in CD patients require further investigation.