ArticleInfection2025
Endothelin-1 in combination with CRB-65 enhance risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.
Article in Infection, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 continuously causes severe disease conditions and significant mortality. We evaluate whether easily accessible biomarkers can improve risk prediction of severe disease outcomes.
methodsOur study analysed 426 COVID-19 patients collected by German CAPNETZ and PROGRESS study groups between 2020 and 2021. Troponin T high-sensitive (TnT-hs), procalcitonin (PCT), N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide, angiopoietin-2, copeptin, endothelin-1 (ET-1) and lipocalin-2 were measured at enrolment and related to 28d mortality/ICU admission endpoint. Logistic and relaxed LASSO regression were used to evaluate the added value of biomarkers compared to the CRB-65 score and to develop a combined risk prediction model for our endpoint.
resultsOf the 426 COVID-19 patients, 64 (15%) reached the endpoint. Among individual biomarkers, ET-1 showed the highest predictive performance (AUC = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.70-0.82). CRB-65 alone had an AUC of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.56-0.70). Our machine learning method identified CRB-65 + ET-1 to be optimal for prediction performance and model sparsity (AUC = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.71-0.83). Decision curve analysis demonstrated its greater net benefit over CRB-65 across large range of risk thresholds. The generalizability of our non-COVID CAP model (CRB-65 + TnT-hs + PCT) to COVID-19 patients was also assessed, yielding an AUC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.60-0.74) for our primary endpoint. For 28d mortality alone as endpoint, it performed remarkably well (AUC = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.95).
conclusionCombining the already established clinical CRB-65 score with ET-1 significantly improves risk prediction of intensive care requirement or death within 28 days in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.