Literature DB >> 31711925

Development and Validation of a Test to Monitor Endoscopic Activity in Patients With Crohn's Disease Based on Serum Levels of Proteins.

Geert D'Haens1, Orlaith Kelly2, Robert Battat3, Mark S Silverberg4, David Laharie5, Edouard Louis6, Edoardo Savarino7, Giorgia Bodini8, Andres Yarur9, Brigid S Boland3, Waqqas Afif10, Xiao-Jun Li11, Michael Hale11, Jessica Ho11, Venkateswarlu Kondragunta11, Benjamin Huang11, Crystal Kuy11, Lauren Okada11, Kelly D Hester11, Kurtis R Bray11, Larry Mimms11, Anjali Jain11, Siddharth Singh3, Angelina Collins3, Mark A Valasek12, William J Sandborn3, Severine Vermeire13, Parambir S Dulai3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Noninvasive tests to measure endoscopic activity in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) have limitations. We aimed to develop a test to identify patients in remission, based on endoscopic analysis, and monitor CD activity based on serum levels of proteins.
METHODS: We developed a test to measure 13 proteins in blood (ANG1, ANG2, CRP, SAA1, IL7, EMMPRIN, MMP1, MMP2, MMP3, MMP9, TGFA, CEACAM1, and VCAM1), called the endoscopic healing index [EHI], using samples from 278 patients with CD from a multinational training cohort. We validated the test using 2 independent cohorts of patients with CD: 116 biologic-naive patients with early-stage CD (validation cohort 1) and 195 biologic-exposed patients with chronic CD (validation cohort 2). The ability of the test to identify patients with active disease vs patients in remission (defined as a simple endoscopic score for CD of ≤2 and ≤1 in each segment, or a total CD endoscopic index of severity score <3) was assessed by using area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of the test was compared with that of measurement of serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and fecal calprotectin.
RESULTS: The EHI scores range from 0 to 100 units; higher scores indicate more severe CD activity, based on endoscopy findings. The EHI identified patients in remission with an AUROC of 0.962 in validation cohort 1 (95% confidence interval, 0.942-0.982) and an AUROC of 0.693 in validation cohort 2 (95% confidence interval, 0.619-0.767), regardless of CD location or phenotype. A cutoff value of 20 points identified patients in remission with the highest level of sensitivity (97.1% in validation cohort 1 and 83.2% in validation cohort 2), with specificity values of 69.0% and 36.6%, respectively. A cutoff value of 50 points identified patients in remission with the highest level of specificity (100% in validation cohort 1 and 87.8% in validation cohort 2), with sensitivity values of 37.3% and 30.0%, respectively. The EHI identified patients in remission with a significantly higher AUROC value than the test for CRP (0.876, P < .001 in validation cohort 1 and 0.624, P = .109 in validation cohort 2). In analysis of patients with available FC measurements, the AUROC value for the EHI did not differ significantly from that of measurement of FC (AUROC, 0.950 for EHI vs AUROC, 0.923 for FC; P = .147 in validation cohort 1 and AUROC, 0.803 for EHI vs AUROC, 0.854 for FC; P = .298 in validation cohort 2).
CONCLUSIONS: We developed an index called the EHI to identify patients with CD in endoscopic remission based on blood levels of 13 proteins. The EHI identified patients with resolution of endoscopic disease activity, with good overall accuracy, although with variation between the 2 cohorts assessed. The EHI AUROC values were comparable to measurement of FC and higher than measurement of serum CRP. The test might be used in practice to assess endoscopic activity in patients with CD.
Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IBD; Monitr; Resolution; Response to Treatment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31711925     DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.10.034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterology        ISSN: 0016-5085            Impact factor:   22.682


  20 in total

1.  A Phenome-Wide Analysis of Healthcare Costs Associated with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

Authors:  Winston Cai; Andrew Cagan; Zeling He; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 2.  Precision medicine: how multiomics will shape the future of inflammatory bowel disease?

Authors:  Nienke Z Borren; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan
Journal:  Curr Opin Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 3.  Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treatments and Predictive Biomarkers of Therapeutic Response.

Authors:  Duaa Ahmed Elhag; Manoj Kumar; Marwa Saadaoui; Anthony K Akobeng; Fatma Al-Mudahka; Mamoun Elawad; Souhaila Al Khodor
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 6.208

4.  A Role for CXCR3 Ligands as Biomarkers of Post-Operative Crohn's Disease Recurrence.

Authors:  Margaret Walshe; Shadi Nayeri; Jiayi Ji; Cristian Hernandez-Rocha; Ksenija Sabic; Liangyuan Hu; Mamta Giri; Shikha Nayar; Steven Brant; Dermot P B McGovern; John D Rioux; Richard H Duerr; Judy H Cho; Phil L Schumm; Mark Lazarev; Mark S Silverberg
Journal:  J Crohns Colitis       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 10.020

Review 5.  Optimizing biologic therapy in IBD: how essential is therapeutic drug monitoring?

Authors:  Marjorie Argollo; Paulo Gustavo Kotze; Pradeep Kakkadasam; Geert D'Haens
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 46.802

6.  Defining the Path Forward for Biomarkers to Address Unmet Needs in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

Authors:  Gerard Honig; Caren Heller; Andrés Hurtado-Lorenzo
Journal:  Inflamm Bowel Dis       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 5.325

7.  Biomarkers of Crohn's Disease to Support the Development of New Therapeutic Interventions.

Authors:  Amy C Porter; Jiri Aubrecht; Chandler Birch; Jonathan Braun; Carolyn Cuff; Suryasarathi Dasgupta; Jeremy D Gale; Robert Hinton; Steven C Hoffmann; Gerard Honig; Bryan Linggi; Marco Schito; Niels Vande Casteele; John-Michael Sauer
Journal:  Inflamm Bowel Dis       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 5.325

8.  Serum biomarkers confirming stable remission in inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  Christoph Kessel; Miha Lavric; Toni Weinhage; Markus Brueckner; Sytze de Roock; Jan Däbritz; Jakob Weber; Sebastiaan J Vastert; Dirk Foell
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Serum proteomic profiling at diagnosis predicts clinical course, and need for intensification of treatment in inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  R Kalla; A T Adams; D Bergemalm; S Vatn; N A Kennedy; P Ricanek; J Lindstrom; A Ocklind; F Hjelm; N T Ventham; G T Ho; C Petren; D Repsilber; J Söderholm; M Pierik; M D'Amato; F Gomollón; C Olbjorn; J Jahnsen; M H Vatn; J Halfvarson; J Satsangi
Journal:  J Crohns Colitis       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 10.020

10.  Immune infiltration-associated serum amyloid A1 predicts favorable prognosis for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Wei Zhang; Hui-Fang Kong; Xu-Dong Gao; Zheng Dong; Ying Lu; Jia-Gan Huang; Hong Li; Yong-Ping Yang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.