Anuj Bohra, Nicholas Batt, Krishneel Dutt, Diana Lewis, Jonathan P Segal, Olga Newiadomski, Abhinav Vasudevan, Daniel R Van Langenberg
{"title":"粪便免疫化学和粪便钙蛋白双重检测的协同作用,可准确评估炎症性肠病的内窥镜和组织学活动。","authors":"Anuj Bohra, Nicholas Batt, Krishneel Dutt, Diana Lewis, Jonathan P Segal, Olga Newiadomski, Abhinav Vasudevan, Daniel R Van Langenberg","doi":"10.1177/17562848241237895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Faecal biomarkers are increasingly utilized for disease assessment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To characterize the relative and combined accuracy of faecal calprotectin (FC) and faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for detecting endoscopic and histologically active disease in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), subdivided by disease location.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A prospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with confirmed IBD undergoing routine ileocolonoscopy for activity assessment were prospectively recruited and performed both FC and FIT ±30 days of ileocolonoscopy. Endoscopic activity was assessed <i>via</i> the simplified endoscopic score for CD, Mayo endoscopic score for UC and histological activity graded as nil/mild/moderate. Receiver-operator curve analyses were utilized to assess the performance of FC and FIT per disease subtype and location.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 137 (79 CD, 57 UC) patients were recruited. FC was more sensitive than FIT in detecting active endoscopic (CD: 91% <i>versus</i> 69%, UC: 94% <i>versus</i> 82%) and histological (CD: 86% <i>versus</i> 55%, UC 88% <i>versus</i> 56%) disease. However, FIT was more specific than FC in detecting active endoscopic (CD: 94% <i>versus</i> 56%, UC: 85% <i>versus</i> 69%) and histological (CD: 93% <i>versus</i> 55%, UC: 96% <i>versus</i> 70%) diseases. FIT was more sensitive and specific than FC in detecting active colonic CD (endoscopic activity: 94% <i>versus</i> 93%, histological activity: 92% <i>versus</i> 77%, respectively); however, it was poorly sensitive for active ileal CD (43% <i>versus</i> 89%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>FC demonstrated higher sensitivity and FIT higher specificity for active IBD. Hence, dual testing was synergistic, displaying excellent performance characteristics across most IBD locations and subtypes, holding promise for future clinical application.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10938618/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The synergy of dual faecal immunochemical and faecal calprotectin testing for accurate assessment of endoscopic and histological activity in inflammatory bowel disease.\",\"authors\":\"Anuj Bohra, Nicholas Batt, Krishneel Dutt, Diana Lewis, Jonathan P Segal, Olga Newiadomski, Abhinav Vasudevan, Daniel R Van Langenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17562848241237895\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Faecal biomarkers are increasingly utilized for disease assessment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To characterize the relative and combined accuracy of faecal calprotectin (FC) and faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for detecting endoscopic and histologically active disease in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), subdivided by disease location.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A prospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with confirmed IBD undergoing routine ileocolonoscopy for activity assessment were prospectively recruited and performed both FC and FIT ±30 days of ileocolonoscopy. Endoscopic activity was assessed <i>via</i> the simplified endoscopic score for CD, Mayo endoscopic score for UC and histological activity graded as nil/mild/moderate. Receiver-operator curve analyses were utilized to assess the performance of FC and FIT per disease subtype and location.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 137 (79 CD, 57 UC) patients were recruited. FC was more sensitive than FIT in detecting active endoscopic (CD: 91% <i>versus</i> 69%, UC: 94% <i>versus</i> 82%) and histological (CD: 86% <i>versus</i> 55%, UC 88% <i>versus</i> 56%) disease. However, FIT was more specific than FC in detecting active endoscopic (CD: 94% <i>versus</i> 56%, UC: 85% <i>versus</i> 69%) and histological (CD: 93% <i>versus</i> 55%, UC: 96% <i>versus</i> 70%) diseases. FIT was more sensitive and specific than FC in detecting active colonic CD (endoscopic activity: 94% <i>versus</i> 93%, histological activity: 92% <i>versus</i> 77%, respectively); however, it was poorly sensitive for active ileal CD (43% <i>versus</i> 89%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>FC demonstrated higher sensitivity and FIT higher specificity for active IBD. Hence, dual testing was synergistic, displaying excellent performance characteristics across most IBD locations and subtypes, holding promise for future clinical application.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10938618/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848241237895\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848241237895","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:粪便生物标记物越来越多地被用于炎症性肠病(IBD)的疾病评估:粪便生物标记物越来越多地被用于炎症性肠病(IBD)的疾病评估:目的:描述粪便钙蛋白(FC)和粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)在检测克罗恩病(CD)和溃疡性结肠炎(UC)内镜和组织学活动性疾病方面的相对准确性和联合准确性,并按疾病部位进行细分:前瞻性队列研究:前瞻性招募接受常规回肠结肠镜检查以进行活动性评估的确诊 IBD 患者,并在回肠结肠镜检查后 30 天内同时进行 FC 和 FIT 检查。内镜活动性通过 CD 的简化内镜评分、UC 的梅奥内镜评分和组织学活动性分级(无/轻度/中度)进行评估。利用接收器-操作者曲线分析评估 FC 和 FIT 在不同疾病亚型和部位的表现:结果:共招募了 137 例(79 例 CD,57 例 UC)患者。在检测活动性内镜疾病(CD:91% 对 69%,UC:94% 对 82%)和组织学疾病(CD:86% 对 55%,UC:88% 对 56%)方面,FC 比 FIT 更敏感。然而,FIT 在检测活动性内镜疾病(CD:94% 对 56%,UC:85% 对 69%)和组织学疾病(CD:93% 对 55%,UC:96% 对 70%)方面比 FC 更特异。在检测活动性结肠 CD 方面,FIT 的灵敏度和特异性均高于 FC(内镜活动性:分别为 94% 对 93%,组织学活动性:分别为 92% 对 77%);但在检测活动性回肠 CD 方面,FIT 的灵敏度较低(43% 对 89%):结论:FC 对活动性 IBD 的敏感性更高,FIT 的特异性更高。结论:对于活动性 IBD,FC 表现出更高的灵敏度,而 FIT 则表现出更高的特异性。因此,双重检测具有协同作用,在大多数 IBD 病变部位和亚型中都表现出卓越的性能特征,为未来的临床应用带来了希望:试验注册:不适用。
The synergy of dual faecal immunochemical and faecal calprotectin testing for accurate assessment of endoscopic and histological activity in inflammatory bowel disease.
Background: Faecal biomarkers are increasingly utilized for disease assessment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
Objectives: To characterize the relative and combined accuracy of faecal calprotectin (FC) and faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for detecting endoscopic and histologically active disease in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), subdivided by disease location.
Design: A prospective cohort study.
Methods: Patients with confirmed IBD undergoing routine ileocolonoscopy for activity assessment were prospectively recruited and performed both FC and FIT ±30 days of ileocolonoscopy. Endoscopic activity was assessed via the simplified endoscopic score for CD, Mayo endoscopic score for UC and histological activity graded as nil/mild/moderate. Receiver-operator curve analyses were utilized to assess the performance of FC and FIT per disease subtype and location.
Results: In all, 137 (79 CD, 57 UC) patients were recruited. FC was more sensitive than FIT in detecting active endoscopic (CD: 91% versus 69%, UC: 94% versus 82%) and histological (CD: 86% versus 55%, UC 88% versus 56%) disease. However, FIT was more specific than FC in detecting active endoscopic (CD: 94% versus 56%, UC: 85% versus 69%) and histological (CD: 93% versus 55%, UC: 96% versus 70%) diseases. FIT was more sensitive and specific than FC in detecting active colonic CD (endoscopic activity: 94% versus 93%, histological activity: 92% versus 77%, respectively); however, it was poorly sensitive for active ileal CD (43% versus 89%).
Conclusion: FC demonstrated higher sensitivity and FIT higher specificity for active IBD. Hence, dual testing was synergistic, displaying excellent performance characteristics across most IBD locations and subtypes, holding promise for future clinical application.