Pieter Hindryckx1,2, Barrett G Levesque1,3, Tom Holvoet2, Serina Durand3, Ceen-Ming Tang4,5, Claire Parker1, Reena Khanna1,6, Lisa M Shackelton1, Geert D'Haens1,7, William J Sandborn1,3, Brian G Feagan1,6,8, Benjamin Lebwohl9, Daniel A Leffler10, Vipul Jairath1,6,8. 1. Robarts Clinical Trials Inc., University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. 2. Department of Gastroenterology, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium. 3. Division of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA. 4. Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 5. Oxford University Clinical Academic Graduate School, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK. 6. Department of Medicine, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. 7. Inflammatory Bowel Disease Centre, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. 9. Celiac Disease Center, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. 10. The Celiac Center, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although several pharmacological agents have emerged as potential adjunctive therapies to a gluten-free diet for coeliac disease, there is currently no widely accepted measure of disease activity used in clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review of coeliac disease activity indices to evaluate their operating properties and potential as outcome measures in registration trials. DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane central library were searched from 1966 to 2015 for eligible studies in adult and/or paediatric patients with coeliac disease that included coeliac disease activity markers in their outcome measures. The operating characteristics of histological indices, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and endoscopic indices were evaluated for content and construct validity, reliability, responsiveness and feasibility using guidelines proposed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). RESULTS: Of 19 123 citations, 286 studies were eligible, including 24 randomised-controlled trials. Three of five PROs identified met most key evaluative criteria but only the Celiac Disease Symptom Diary (CDSD) and the Celiac Disease Patient-Reported Outcome (CeD PRO) have been approved by the FDA. All histological and endoscopic scores identified lacked content validity. Quantitative morphometric histological analysis had better reliability and responsiveness compared with qualitative scales. Endoscopic indices were infrequently used, and only one index demonstrated responsiveness to effective therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Current best evidence suggests that the CDSD and the CeD PRO are appropriate for use in the definition of primary end points in coeliac disease registration trials. Morphometric histology should be included as a key secondary or co-primary end point. Further work is needed to optimise end point configuration to inform efficient drug development. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVE: Although several pharmacological agents have emerged as potential adjunctive therapies to a gluten-free diet for coeliac disease, there is currently no widely accepted measure of disease activity used in clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review of coeliac disease activity indices to evaluate their operating properties and potential as outcome measures in registration trials. DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane central library were searched from 1966 to 2015 for eligible studies in adult and/or paediatric patients with coeliac disease that included coeliac disease activity markers in their outcome measures. The operating characteristics of histological indices, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and endoscopic indices were evaluated for content and construct validity, reliability, responsiveness and feasibility using guidelines proposed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). RESULTS: Of 19 123 citations, 286 studies were eligible, including 24 randomised-controlled trials. Three of five PROs identified met most key evaluative criteria but only the Celiac Disease Symptom Diary (CDSD) and the Celiac Disease Patient-Reported Outcome (CeD PRO) have been approved by the FDA. All histological and endoscopic scores identified lacked content validity. Quantitative morphometric histological analysis had better reliability and responsiveness compared with qualitative scales. Endoscopic indices were infrequently used, and only one index demonstrated responsiveness to effective therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Current best evidence suggests that the CDSD and the CeD PRO are appropriate for use in the definition of primary end points in coeliac disease registration trials. Morphometric histology should be included as a key secondary or co-primary end point. Further work is needed to optimise end point configuration to inform efficient drug development. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Authors: Marijn J Warners; Pieter Hindryckx; Barrett G Levesque; Claire E Parker; Lisa M Shackelton; Reena Khanna; William J Sandborn; Geert R D'Haens; Brian G Feagan; Albert J Bredenoord; Vipul Jairath Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2017-10-17 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Alejandro Martínez-Rodríguez; Daniela Alejandra Loaiza-Martínez; Javier Sánchez-Sánchez; Jacobo Á Rubio-Arias; Fernando Alacid; Soledad Prats-Moya; María Martínez-Olcina; Rodrigo Yáñez-Sepúlveda; Nuria Asencio-Mas; Pablo J Marcos-Pardo Journal: Front Nutr Date: 2022-06-16
Authors: Jack A Syage; Peter H R Green; Chaitan Khosla; Daniel C Adelman; Jennifer A Sealey-Voyksner; Joseph A Murray Journal: GastroHep Date: 2019-10-08
Authors: Mitchell E Garber; Alok Saldanha; Joel S Parker; Wendell D Jones; Katri Kaukinen; Kaija Laurila; Marja-Leena Lähdeaho; Purvesh Khatri; Chaitan Khosla; Daniel C Adelman; Markku Mäki Journal: Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2017-01-28
Authors: Jonas F Ludvigsson; Carolina Ciacci; Peter Hr Green; Katri Kaukinen; Ilma R Korponay-Szabo; Kalle Kurppa; Joseph A Murray; Knut Erik Aslaksen Lundin; Markku J Maki; Alina Popp; Norelle R Reilly; Alfonso Rodriguez-Herrera; David S Sanders; Detlef Schuppan; Sarah Sleet; Juha Taavela; Kristin Voorhees; Marjorie M Walker; Daniel A Leffler Journal: Gut Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 23.059