A Damms1, S C Bischoff. 1. Department of Nutritional Medicine (180), University of Hohenheim, Fruhwirtstr. 12, 70593 Stuttgart, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: Objective of this study was to compare the assay characteristics of a new fecal calprotectin rapid test with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The second aim was to assess the potential of measuring fecal calprotectin as screening method for intestinal inflammation and colorectal malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred forty patients with lower gastrointestinal symptoms referred to colonoscopy provided fecal samples (56, control group; 18, diverticulosis; 29, colorectal adenoma; 8, colorectal carcinoma (CRC); 18, active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); 11, intestinal infections). Feces were analyzed by two assay methods. RESULTS: Compared to the control group (median 25.8 microg/g), calprotectin levels were significantly increased in adenoma (66.3 microg/g), CRC (164 microg/g), intestinal infections (306 microg/g), and active IBD (797 microg/g). An adequate diagnostic accuracy could be found for active IBD with a sensitivity, specificity, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 100%, 79%, and 0.955 (ELISA) vs. 89%, 80%, and 0.896 (rapid test). Similar results were obtained for CRC (100%, 79%, 0.922 vs. 100%, 80%, 0.948) whereas in adenomas a low sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of 55%, 79%, and 0.686 vs. 52%, 80%, and 0.666 were found for fecal calprotectin. CONCLUSIONS: Both fecal calprotectin assays are effective in identifying active IBD and CRC but lack analytical sensitivity in separating CRC from adenoma as well as adenoma from the control group. The new calprotectin rapid test is a convenient method for assessing the calprotectin level in an outpatient setting. Henceforth, it provides a precondition for the fecal calprotectin method to challenge fecal occult blood testing in further evaluations.
AIMS: Objective of this study was to compare the assay characteristics of a new fecal calprotectin rapid test with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The second aim was to assess the potential of measuring fecal calprotectin as screening method for intestinal inflammation and colorectal malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred forty patients with lower gastrointestinal symptoms referred to colonoscopy provided fecal samples (56, control group; 18, diverticulosis; 29, colorectal adenoma; 8, colorectal carcinoma (CRC); 18, active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); 11, intestinal infections). Feces were analyzed by two assay methods. RESULTS: Compared to the control group (median 25.8 microg/g), calprotectin levels were significantly increased in adenoma (66.3 microg/g), CRC (164 microg/g), intestinal infections (306 microg/g), and active IBD (797 microg/g). An adequate diagnostic accuracy could be found for active IBD with a sensitivity, specificity, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 100%, 79%, and 0.955 (ELISA) vs. 89%, 80%, and 0.896 (rapid test). Similar results were obtained for CRC (100%, 79%, 0.922 vs. 100%, 80%, 0.948) whereas in adenomas a low sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of 55%, 79%, and 0.686 vs. 52%, 80%, and 0.666 were found for fecal calprotectin. CONCLUSIONS: Both fecal calprotectin assays are effective in identifying active IBD and CRC but lack analytical sensitivity in separating CRC from adenoma as well as adenoma from the control group. The new calprotectin rapid test is a convenient method for assessing the calprotectin level in an outpatient setting. Henceforth, it provides a precondition for the fecal calprotectin method to challenge fecal occult blood testing in further evaluations.
Authors: O Kronborg; M Ugstad; P Fuglerud; B Johne; J Hardcastle; J H Scholefield; K Vellacott; V Moshakis; J R Reynolds Journal: Gut Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Paul J Limburg; Mary E Devens; Jonathan J Harrington; Nancy N Diehl; Douglas W Mahoney; David A Ahlquist Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Ashwini Banerjee; M Srinivas; Richard Eyre; Robert Ellis; Norman Waugh; K D Bardhan; P Basumani Journal: Frontline Gastroenterol Date: 2014-04-02
Authors: Frank Serge Lehmann; Francesca Trapani; Ida Fueglistaler; Luigi Maria Terracciano; Markus von Flüe; Gieri Cathomas; Andreas Zettl; Pascal Benkert; Daniel Oertli; Christoph Beglinger Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Martha Betson; Jose Carlos Sousa-Figueiredo; Candia Rowell; Narcis B Kabatereine; J Russell Stothard Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Ferdinando D'Amico; David T Rubin; Paulo Gustavo Kotze; Fernando Magro; Britta Siegmund; Taku Kobayashi; Pablo A Olivera; Peter Bossuyt; Lieven Pouillon; Edouard Louis; Eugeni Domènech; Subrata Ghosh; Silvio Danese; Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2021-05-07 Impact factor: 4.623