IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0247275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development and validation of a prediction model for tocilizumab failure in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Mussini
  • Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri
  • Marianna Menozzi
  • Marianna Meschiari
  • Erica Franceschini
  • Jovana Milic
  • Lucio Brugioni
  • Antonello Pietrangelo
  • Massimo Girardis
  • Andrea Cossarizza
  • Roberto Tonelli
  • Enrico Clini
  • Marco Massari
  • Michele Bartoletti
  • Anna Ferrari
  • Anna Maria Cattelan
  • Paola Zuccalà
  • Miriam Lichtner
  • Roberto Rossotti
  • Enrico Girardi
  • Emanuele Nicastri
  • Massimo Puoti
  • Andrea Antinori
  • Pierluigi Viale
  • Giovanni Guaraldi

Abstract

Background: The aim of this secondary analysis of the TESEO cohort is to identify, early in the course of treatment with tocilizumab, factors associated with the risk of progressing to mechanical ventilation and death and develop a risk score to estimate the risk of this outcome according to patients’ profile. Methods: Patients with COVID-19 severe pneumonia receiving standard of care + tocilizumab who were alive and free from mechanical ventilation at day 6 after treatment initiation were included in this retrospective, multicenter cohort study. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to identify predictors of mechanical ventilation or death by day-28 from treatment initiation and β-coefficients were used to develop a risk score. Secondary outcome was mortality. Patients with the same inclusion criteria as the derivation cohort from 3 independent hospitals were used as validation cohort. Results: 266 patients treated with tocilizumab were included. By day 28 of hospital follow-up post treatment initiation, 40 (15%) underwent mechanical ventilation or died [26 (10%)]. At multivariable analysis, sex, day-4 PaO2/FiO2 ratio, platelets and CRP were independently associated with the risk of developing the study outcomes and were used to generate the proposed risk score. The accuracy of the score in AUC was 0.80 and 0.70 in internal validation and test for the composite endpoint and 0.92 and 0.69 for death, respectively. Conclusions: Our score could assist clinicians in identifying, early after tocilizumab administration, patients who are likely to progress to mechanical ventilation or death, so that they could be selected for eventual rescue therapies.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Mussini & Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri & Marianna Menozzi & Marianna Meschiari & Erica Franceschini & Jovana Milic & Lucio Brugioni & Antonello Pietrangelo & Massimo Girardis & Andrea Cossarizza & , 2021. "Development and validation of a prediction model for tocilizumab failure in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-14, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247275
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247275
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247275&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0247275?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247275. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.