4.6 Article

C3a and C5b-9 Differentially Predict COVID-19 Progression and Outcome

Journal

LIFE-BASEL
Volume 12, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/life12091335

Keywords

COVID-19; complement; biomarkers; mortality

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that elevated levels of C3a and C5b-9 are associated with the severity and poor prognosis of COVID-19. C3a and C5b-9 can serve as predictive markers for the progression and outcome of COVID-19.
SARS-CoV-2 infection may result in severe pneumonia leading to mechanical ventilation and intensive care (ICU) treatment. Complement activation was verified in COVID-19 and implicated as a contributor to COVID-19 pathogenesis. This study assessed the predictive potential of complement factors C3a and C5b-9 for COVID-19 progression and outcome. We grouped 80 COVID-19 patients into severe COVID-19 patients (n = 38) and critically ill (n = 42) and subdivided into non-intubated (n = 48) and intubated (n = 32), survivors (n = 57) and non-survivors (n = 23). Results: A significant increase for C3a and C5b-9 levels was observed between: severely and critically ill patients (p < 0.001 and p < 0.0001), non-intubated vs intubated (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05), survivors vs non-survivors (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01). ROC analysis for the need for ICU treatment revealed a higher AUC for C5b-9 (0.764, p < 0.001) compared to C3a (AUC = 0.739, p < 0.01). A higher AUC was observed for C3a for the need for intubation (AUC = 0.722, p < 0.001) or mortality (AUC = 0.740, p < 0.0001) compared to C5b-9 (need for intubation AUC = 0.656, p < 0.05 and mortality AUC = 0.631, p = NS). Combining the two markers revealed a powerful prediction tool for ICU admission (AUC = 0.773, p < 0.0001), intubation (AUC = 0.756, p < 0.0001) and mortality (AUC = 0.753, p < 0.001). C3a and C5b-9 may be considered as prognostic tools separately or in combination for the progression and outcome of COVID-19.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available