Comparative Prognostic Performance of 18 Routine Laboratory-Derived Indices for In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with COVID-19

Background/Objectives: Numerous hematologic, inflammatory, biochemical, and nutritional indices have been proposed as prognostic markers in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but direct comparison of a broad range of these indices within the same cohort remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the prognostic performance of multiple routinely available indices for in-hospital mortality. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort included 1952 adults hospitalized with COVID-19. Demographic, clinical, comorbidity, and laboratory data were obtained from medical records. Eighteen derived indices were evaluated, including NLR, PLR, SII, CAR, CLR, LAR, UAR, CPR, DAR, and PNI. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to assess discrimination for in-hospital mortality, and optimal cut-offs were determined using the Youden index. Selected indices were further evaluated in separate multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, diabetes mellitus, CAD/IHD, and eGFR. Results: In-hospital mortality occurred in 80 patients (4.1%). Non-survivors were older and had higher inflammatory and biochemical markers and lower lymphocyte counts and albumin levels. CAR and CLR showed the highest numerical AUCs for in-hospital mortality (0.870 for both), followed by PNI (0.857), CPR (0.852), DAR (0.829), UAR (0.823), LAR (0.815), and NLR (0.807). In separate multivariable models adjusted for age, sex, diabetes mellitus, CAD/IHD, and eGFR, ln(CLR), ln(CAR), ln(CPR), ln(LAR), ln(UAR), ln(NLR), ln(dNLR), and ln(DAR) remained independently associated with mortality (all p < 0.001). Among the adjusted models, the CLR model showed the highest explained variance (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.511) with good calibration (Hosmer–Lemeshow p = 0.997); ln(CLR) remained independently associated with mortality (aOR 3.590, 95% CI 2.517–5.120; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Several routinely available composite indices were associated with in-hospital mortality in COVID-19. Among the evaluated indices, CAR and CLR showed the highest individual discrimination, while the CLR-based adjusted model showed the most favorable model-fit profile among the multivariable models evaluated. Multiple selected indices remained independently associated with mortality after adjustment for clinical covariates. These findings suggest that such markers may have potential value as adjunctive tools for mortality risk stratification.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15218419
Primary Topic
COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Prognostic Performance of 18 Routine Laboratory-Derived Indices for In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with COVID-19

Jehat Kılıç, Sedat Çiçek, Mehmet Serdar Yıldırım, Süleyman Özçaylak et al.
2 links
Journal of Clinical Medicine
COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
article

Comparative Prognostic Performance of 18 Routine Laboratory-Derived Indices for In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with COVID-19

Jehat Kılıç, Sedat Çiçek, Mehmet Serdar Yıldırım, Süleyman Özçaylak, Ferhat Bingöl, Selman Çetin, Nizam Demir
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Numerous hematologic, inflammatory, biochemical, and nutritional indices have been proposed as prognostic markers in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but direct comparison of a broad range of these indices within the same cohort remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the prognostic performance of multiple routinely available indices for in-hospital mortality. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort included 1952 adults hospitalized with COVID-19. Demographic, clinical, comorbidity, and laboratory data were obtained from medical records. Eighteen derived indices were evaluated, including NLR, PLR, SII, CAR, CLR, LAR, UAR, CPR, DAR, and PNI. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to assess discrimination for in-hospital mortality, and optimal cut-offs were determined using the Youden index. Selected indices were further evaluated in separate multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, diabetes mellitus, CAD/IHD, and eGFR. Results: In-hospital mortality occurred in 80 patients (4.1%). Non-survivors were older and had higher inflammatory and biochemical markers and lower lymphocyte counts and albumin levels. CAR and CLR showed the highest numerical AUCs for in-hospital mortality (0.870 for both), followed by PNI (0.857), CPR (0.852), DAR (0.829), UAR (0.823), LAR (0.815), and NLR (0.807). In separate multivariable models adjusted for age, sex, diabetes mellitus, CAD/IHD, and eGFR, ln(CLR), ln(CAR), ln(CPR), ln(LAR), ln(UAR), ln(NLR), ln(dNLR), and ln(DAR) remained independently associated with mortality (all p < 0.001). Among the adjusted models, the CLR model showed the highest explained variance (Nagelkerke R2 = 0.511) with good calibration (Hosmer–Lemeshow p = 0.997); ln(CLR) remained independently associated with mortality (aOR 3.590, 95% CI 2.517–5.120; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Several routinely available composite indices were associated with in-hospital mortality in COVID-19. Among the evaluated indices, CAR and CLR showed the highest individual discrimination, while the CLR-based adjusted model showed the most favorable model-fit profile among the multivariable models evaluated. Multiple selected indices remained independently associated with mortality after adjustment for clinical covariates. These findings suggest that such markers may have potential value as adjunctive tools for mortality risk stratification.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 15(21)
Fırat University (TR), Diyarbakır Gazi Yaşargil Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi (TR), Elazığ Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi (TR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon