COVID-19 has spread rapidly and caused a global pandemic making it one of the deadliest in history. Early identification of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who may develop critical illness is of immense importance. Therefore, novel biomarkers were needed to identify patients who will suffer rapid disease progression to severe complications and death. Many treatments were adopted including the antiviral Remdesivir, the antiretroviral Lopinavir /Ritonavir and Tocilizumab. Our study aimed not only to specify high-risk factors and biomarkers of fatal outcome in hospitalized subjects with coronavirus but also to compare the efficacy of the three considered treatments to help clinicians better choose a therapeutic strategy and reduce mortality. We divided the population (n=711) into four main groups based according to the WHO ordinal severity scale. The percentage of mortality, in and out the hospital, the length of stay in the hospital, the pulmonary inflammatory lesion and its distribution, the SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG variations at admission, the inflammatory markers, the complete blood count, the coagulation factors and enzymes, proteins and electrolytes profile, glucose and lipid profile, and other relevant markers were measured. The significance of the observed variation was assessed by multivariate and ANOVA analyses. We succeeded to establish a novel predictive scoring model of disease progression based on a cohort of Lebanese hospitalized patients relying on the pulmonary inflammatory lesions, inflammation biomarkers such as LDH, D-Dimer, CRP, IL-6 and the lymphocyte count, the number of comorbidities and the age of the patient which all were significantly correlated with the illness severity showing best outcomes with immunomodulatory and anticoagulant treatments by the results. As top tier, Tocilizumab was more efficient than the two other treatments in non-severe cases but none of the used treatments was insanely effective alone to reduce mortality in severe cases.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

NCT05848427

This study did not receive any funding

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

All donors provided written informed consent, and samples were collected accordingly to the ethical codes: the study protocol was approved by the institutional review committee of the SZUMC (MA-LE-E-60/2022).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors