Pre-test probability for SARS-Cov-2-related Infection Score: the PARIS score

Background Diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection (mostly RT-PCR and Computed Tomography) are not widely available in numerous countries, expensive and with imperfect performance Methods This multicenter retrospective study aimed to determine a pre-test probability score for SARS-CoV-2 infection based on clinical and biological variables. Patients were recruited from emergency and infectious disease departments and were divided into a training and a validation cohort. Demographic characteristics, clinical symptoms, and results of blood tests (complete white blood cell count, serum electrolytes and CRP) were collected. The pre-test probability score was derived from univariate analyses between patients and controls, followed by multivariate binary logistic analysis to determine the independent variables associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Points were assigned to each variable to create the PARIS score. ROC curve analysis determined the area under the curve (AUC). Findings One hundred subjects with clinical suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in the training cohort, and 300 other consecutive individuals were included in the validation cohort. Low lymphocyte (<1·3 G/L), eosinophil (<0·06G/L), basophil (<0·04G/L) and neutrophil counts (<5G/L) were associated with a high probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection. No clinical variable was statistically significant. The score had a good performance in the validation cohort (AUC=0.889 (CI: [0.846–0.932]; STD=0.022) with a sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value of high-probability score of 80·3% and 92·3% respectively. Furthermore, a low-probability score excluded SARS-CoV-2 infection with a Negative Predictive Value of 99.5%. Interpretation The PARIS score based on complete white blood cell count has a good performance to categorize the pre-test probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection. It could help clinicians avoid diagnostic tests in patients with a low-probability score and conversely keep on testing individuals with high-probability score but negative RT-PCR or CT. It could prove helpful in countries with a low-availability of PCR and/or CT during the current period of pandemic. Funding None Evidence before this study In numerous countries, large population testing is impossible due to the limited availability and costs of RT-PCR kits and CT-scan. Furthermore, false-negativity of PCR or CT as well as COVID-19 pneumonia mimickers on CT may lead to inaccurate diagnoses. Pre-test probability combining clinical and biological features has proven to be a particularly useful tool, already used in clinical practice for management of patients with a suspicion of pulmonary embolism. Added value of this study This retrospective study including 400 patients with clinical suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection was composed of a training and a validation cohort. The pre-test probability score (PARIS score) determines 3 levels of probability of SARS-CoV2 infection based on white blood cell count (lymphocyte, eosinophil, basophil and neutrophil cell count). Implications of the available evidence This pre-test probability may help to adapt SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnostic tests. The high negative predictive value (99·5%) of the low probability category may help avoid further tests, especially during a pandemic with overwhelmed resources. A high probability score combined with typical CT features can be considered sufficient for diagnosis confirmation. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement No funding was received ### Author Declarations All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript. Yes All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. 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 and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes All data from this manuscript are available