Background Age and comorbidities increase COVID-19 related in-hospital mortality risk, but the extent by which comorbidities mediate the impact of age remains unknown. Methods In this multicenter retrospective cohort study with data from 45 Dutch hospitals, 4806 proven COVID-19 patients hospitalized in Dutch hospitals (between February and July 2020) from the CAPACITY-COVID registry were included (age 69[58–77]years, 64% men). The primary outcome was defined as a combination of in-hospital mortality or discharge with palliative care. Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the associations between sex, age, and comorbidities with the primary outcome. The effect of comorbidities on the relation of age with the primary outcome was evaluated using mediation analysis. Results In-hospital COVID-19 related mortality occurred in 1108 (23%) patients, 836 (76%) were aged ≥70 years (70+). Both age 70+ and female sex were univariably associated with outcome (odds ratio [OR]4.68, 95%confidence interval [4.02–5.45], OR0.68[0.59–0.79], respectively;both p<  0.001). All comorbidities were univariably associated with outcome (p<0.001), and all but dyslipidemia remained significant after adjustment for age70+ and sex. The impact of comorbidities was attenuated after age-spline adjustment, only leaving female sex, diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (COPD) significantly associated (female OR0.65[0.55–0.75], DM OR1.47[1.26–1.72], CKD OR1.61[1.32–1.97], COPD OR1.30[1.07–1.59]). Pre-existing comorbidities in older patients negligibly (<6% in all comorbidities) mediated the association between higher age and outcome. Conclusions Age is the main determinant of COVID-19 related in-hospital mortality, with negligible mediation effect of pre-existing comorbidities. Trial registration CAPACITY-COVID (NCT04325412)

ISRCTN06195297.

BackgroundThe Zwolle Risk Score (ZRS) identifies ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) eligible for early discharge. We aimed to investigate whether baseline N‐terminal pro–brain natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) is also able to identify these patients and could improve future risk strategies.Methods and ResultsPPCI patients included in the Ongoing Tirofiban in Myocardial Infarction Evaluation (On‐TIME) II study were candidates (N=861). We analyzed whether ZRS and baseline NT‐proBNP predicted 30‐day mortality and assessed the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and major bleeding. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to assess discriminative accuracy for ZRS, NT‐pro‐BNP, and their combination. After multiple imputation, 845 patients were included. Both ZRS >3 (hazard ratio [HR]=9.42; P<0.001) and log NT‐pro‐BNP (HR=2.61; P<0.001) values were associated with 30‐day mortality. On multivariate analysis, both the ZRS (HR=1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.27 to 1.56; P<0.001) and log NT‐proBNP (HR=2.09; 95% CI=1.59 to 2.74; P<0.001) independently predicted death at 30 days. The area under the curve for 30‐day mortality for combined ZRS/NT‐proBNP was 0.94 (95% CI=0.90 to 0.99), with optimal predictive values of a ZRS ≥2 and a NT‐proBNP value of ≥200 pg/mL. Using these cut‐off values, 64% of the study population could be identified as very low risk with zero mortality at 30 days follow‐up and low occurrence of MACEs and major bleeding between 48 hours and 10 days (1.3% and 0.6%, respectively).ConclusionBaseline NT‐proBNP identifies a large group of low‐risk patients who may be eligible for early (48‐ to 72‐hour) discharge, whereas optimal predictive accuracy is reached by the combination of both baseline NT‐proBNP and ZRS.

BackgroundThe biomarker N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) predicts outcome in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). Whether NT-proBNP has incremental prognostic value beyond established risk strategies is still questionable.PurposeTo evaluate the predictive value of NT-proBNP for 30-day mortality over and beyond the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk scores in patients with NSTE-ACS.MethodsPatients included in our ACS registry were candidates. NT-proBNP levels on admission were measured and the GRACE and TIMI risk scores were assessed. We compared the predictive value of NT-proBNP to both risk scores and evaluated whether NT-proBNP improves prognostication by using receiver operator curves and measures of discrimination improvement.ResultsA total of 1324 patients were included and 50 patients died during follow-up. On logistic regression analysis NT-proBNP and the GRACE risk score (but not the TIMI risk score) both independently predicted mortality at 30 days. The predictive value of NT-proBNP did not differ significantly compared to the GRACE risk score (area under the curve [AUC]) 0.85 vs 0.87 p=0.67) but was considerably higher in comparison to the TIMI risk score (AUC 0.60 p<0.001). Adjustment of the GRACE risk score by adding NT-proBNP did not improve prognostication: AUC 0.86 (p=0.57), integrated discrimination improvement 0.04 (p=0.003), net reclassification improvement 0.12 (p=0.21).ConclusionIn patients with NSTE-ACS, NT-proBNP and the GRACE risk score (but not the TIMI risk score) both have good and comparable predictive value for 30-day mortality. However, incremental prognostic value of NT-proBNP beyond the GRACE risk score could not be demonstrated.