| Literature DB >> 28540290 |
Laura Francesca Pisani1, Gian Eugenio Tontini1, Beatrice Marinoni1, Vincenzo Villanacci2, Barbara Bruni3, Maurizio Vecchi1,4, Luca Pastorelli1,4.
Abstract
One of the most common causes of chronic diarrhea is ascribed to microscopic colitis (MC). MC is classified in subtypes: collagenous colitis (CC) and lymphocytic colitis (LC). Patients with MC report watery, non-bloody diarrhea of chronic course, abdominal pain, weight loss, and fatigue that may impair patient's health-related quality of life. A greater awareness, and concomitantly an increasing number of diagnoses over the last years, has demonstrated that the incidence and prevalence of MC are on the rise. To date, colonoscopy with histological analysis on multiple biopsies collected along the colon represents the unique accepted procedure used to assess the diagnosis of active MC and to evaluate the response to medical therapy. Therefore, the emerging need for less-invasive procedures that are also rapid, convenient, standardized, and reproducible, has encouraged scientists to turn their attention to the identification of inflammatory markers and other molecules in blood or feces and within the colonic tissue that can confirm a MC diagnosis. This review gives an update on the biomarkers that are potentially available for the identification of inflammatory activity, related to CC and LC.Entities:
Keywords: biomarkers; chronic diarrhea; collagenous colitis; lymphocytic colitis; microscopic colitis
Year: 2017 PMID: 28540290 PMCID: PMC5423903 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2017.00054
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
Figure 1Histological features of microscopic colitis. Hematoxylin and eosin (A) and anti-CD3 (B) staining in lymphocytic colitis; black arrows indicate intraepithelial lymphocyte infiltration. Hematoxylin and eosin (C) and Masson’s Trichrome staining (D) in collagenous colitis; arrows point to the subepithelial collagen band. All images also show surface epithelial injury and lamina propria increased cellularity (original magnification: 40×).
Prevalence of autoantibodies in serum of patients affected by microscopic colitis.
| Serum marker | Setting | Prevalence (%) | Sample size ( | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-nuclear antibodies | CC | 10 | 77 | Roth et al. ( |
| 26 | 26 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| LC | 20 | 56 | Roth et al. ( | |
| 12 | 16 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| HC | 5 | 100 | Roth et al. ( | |
| 5 | 43 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| Anti- | CC | 9 | 77 | Roth et al. ( |
| 15 | 26 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| LC | 18 | 56 | Roth et al. ( | |
| 13 | 16 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| HC | 8 | 50 | Roth et al. ( | |
| 0 | 43 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| Anti-thyroid peroxidase | CC | 12 | 77 | Roth et al. ( |
| LC | 16 | 56 | Roth et al. ( | |
| HC | 7 | 50 | Roth et al. ( | |
| Anti-perinuclear neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies | CC | 5 | 77 | Roth et al. ( |
| LC | 5 | 56 | Roth et al. ( | |
| HC | 0 | 50 | Roth et al. ( | |
| 1 | 43 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| Anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase | CC | 5 | 77 | Roth et al. ( |
| LC | 5 | 56 | Roth et al. ( | |
| HC | 0 | 120 | Roth et al. ( | |
| 0 | 43 | Holstein et al. ( | ||
| Anti-mitochondrial antibodies | CC | Not declared | 13 | Protic et al. ( |
| CC | 8 | 38 | Bohr et al. ( | |
| LC | Not declared | 46 | Protic et al. ( | |
| HC | Not declared | 18 | Protic et al. ( | |
| 5 | 38 | Bohr et al. ( |
LC, lymphocytic colitis; CC, collagenous colitis; HC, healthy control.
Fecal proteins increased in MC.
| Cell type | Fecal marker | Setting | Findings and statistics | Sample size ( | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neutrophils | Myeloperoxidase | CC vs. HC | Median 11.7 vs. 2.5 µg/g | 18 vs. 20 | Lettesjö et al. ( |
| CC vs. IBS | Median 11.7 vs. 1.7 µg/g | 18 vs. 46 | Lettesjö et al. ( | ||
| CC vs. HC | 10.4 vs. 4.9 µg/g | 9 vs. 45 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| LC vs. HC | 9.6 vs. 4.9 µg/g | 4 vs. 45 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| Calprotectin S100A8/S100A9 | Active CC vs. Quiescent CC | Median 80 vs. 26 µg/g | 21 vs. 12 | Wildt et al. ( | |
| CC vs. HC | Median 80 vs. 6.25 µg/g | 21 vs. 13 | Wildt et al. ( | ||
| IBD vs. other colitis | Median 349 vs. 92 vs. 49 µg/g | 24 vs. 21 vs. 21 | Caviglia et al. ( | ||
| CC vs. HC | 74 vs. 61 µg/g | 9 vs. 45 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| LC vs. HC | 42.7 vs. 61 µg/g | 4 vs. 45 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| Lactoferrin | Active CC vs. Quiescent CC | 1 vs. 0 (no. of positive tests) | 21 vs. 12 | Wildt et al. ( | |
| Eosinophils | Eosinophil protein X | CC vs. HC | Median 3.8 vs. 0.46 µg/g | 18 vs. 20 | Lettesjö et al. ( |
| CC vs. IBS | Median 3.8 vs. 0.44 µg/g | 18 vs. 46 | Lettesjö et al. ( | ||
| CC vs. HC | 5.7 vs. 0.82 µg/g | 9 vs. 46 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| LC vs. HC | 1.7 vs. 0.82 µg/g | 4 vs. 46 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| Eosinophil cationic protein | CC vs. HC | 92% of CC > upper limit of normal | 12 vs. 44 | Wagner et al. ( | |
| CC vs. HC | 5.3 vs. 1.5 µg/g | 9 vs. 46 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| LC vs. HC | 2.6 vs. 0.82 µg/g | 4 vs. 46 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| Mast cells | Tryptase | CC vs. IBS vs. HC | 50 vs. 13 vs. 5.3% detectable levels | 18 vs. 46 vs. 19 | Lettesjö et al. ( |
| Other leukocytes | IL-1β | CC vs. IBS vs. HC | 18% CC detectable levels Undetectable in IBS and HC | 18 vs. 46 vs. 19 | Lettesjö et al. ( |
| Tumor necrosis factor α | CC vs. IBS vs. HC | Undetectable levels | 18 vs. 46 vs. 19 | Lettesjö et al. ( | |
| Enteroendocrine cells | Chromogranin A | CC vs. HC | 12 vs. 43 | Wagner et al. ( | |
| CC vs. IBD | 12 vs. 32 | Wagner et al. ( | |||
| Chromogranin B | CC vs. HC | 12 vs. 43 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| CC vs. IBD | 12 vs. 32 | Wagner et al. ( | |||
| Secretoneurin | CC vs. HC | 12 vs. 43 | Wagner et al. ( | ||
| CC vs. IBD | 12 vs. 32 | Wagner et al. ( |
LC, lymphocytic colitis; CC, collagenous colitis; HC, healthy control; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IBS, irritable bowel syndrome.
.
Tissue markers in microscopic colitis (MC).
| Tissue marker | MC | Localization | Diagnostic accuracy | Sample Size ( | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chromogranin A | LC | Higher in left colon | 27.2 ± 1.4 cells/mm2 LC vs. 8.9 ± 0.6 cells/mm2 HC | 57 vs. 54 | El-Salhy et al. ( |
| Tenascins (TNs) | CC | Subepithelial band | 12–28 µm CC vs. 4–6 µm HC | 15 vs. 15 | Anagnostopoulos et al. ( |
| Type IV collagen | CC | Deep part of the crypts, penetrating blood vessels | CC > 10 labeled cells/mf | 12 vs. 7 | Günther et al. ( |
| Matrix-metalloproteinase-1 | CC | Subepithelial band | CC > 7 labeled cells/mf | 12 vs. 7 | Günther et al. ( |
| Tissue of metalloproteinases-1 | CC | Subepithelial band | CC > 10 labeled cells/mf | 12 vs. 7 | Günther et al. ( |
| Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) | CC | Epithelium | 11.61% CC vs. 1.10% HC | 21 vs. 5 | Griga et al. ( |
| VEGF | CC | Leukocytes in the Lamina propria | 0.89% CC vs. 0.04% HC | 21 vs. 5 | Griga et al. ( |
| EP4 receptor | CC | Intestinal epithelial cells, lymphocytes, and lamina propria | expression CC > 10 folds vs. HC | 8 vs. 12 | Dey et al. ( |
| Cyclooxygenase-2 | CC | Mononuclear cells in the lamina propria | Staining ratio 1.93 CC vs. 2.59 HC | 10 vs. 8 | Wildt et al. ( |
| iNOS | MC | Epithelial cells of the luminal border of crypts | OD 8.2 ± 1.5 MC vs. OD 0.8 ± 0.2 HC | 12 vs. 6 | Perner et al. ( |
LC, lymphocytic colitis; CC, collagenous colitis; HC, healthy control; mf, microscopic field; OD, optical density.