The Accuracy of a Home-performed Faecal Calprotectin Test in Paediatric Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Language English Country United States Media print
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Observational Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Biomarkers analysis MeSH
- Smartphone MeSH
- Crohn Disease diagnostic imaging metabolism MeSH
- Child MeSH
- Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay MeSH
- Feces chemistry MeSH
- Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal MeSH
- Wound Healing MeSH
- Leukocyte L1 Antigen Complex analysis MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Adolescent MeSH
- Mobile Applications MeSH
- Self Care MeSH
- Area Under Curve MeSH
- Prospective Studies MeSH
- Reagent Kits, Diagnostic standards MeSH
- Reproducibility of Results MeSH
- ROC Curve MeSH
- Intestinal Mucosa diagnostic imaging physiopathology MeSH
- Severity of Illness Index MeSH
- Colitis, Ulcerative diagnostic imaging metabolism MeSH
- Check Tag
- Child MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Adolescent MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Observational Study MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Biomarkers MeSH
- Leukocyte L1 Antigen Complex MeSH
- Reagent Kits, Diagnostic MeSH
OBJECTIVES: Owing to the invasiveness of endoscopy, the use of biomarkers, especially faecal calprotectin (FC), has become standard for remission assessment. This study aimed to compare the accuracy for detection of endoscopic activity using recently developed FC home test using smartphone application (FC-IBDoc) against standard enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). METHODS: In all, 102 consecutive observations (89 participants) were included in prospective observational study. FC-IBDoc was performed parallelly with FC-ELISA in paediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease indicated for endoscopy. Both tests were performed by trained staff. Mucosal healing was defined using Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn disease (CD) ≤2 in patients with CD (n = 44), ulcerative colitis (UC) Endoscopic Index of Severity ≤4 in patients with UC (n = 27) and Rutgeerts score i0 and i1 without colon involvement in patients with CD after ileocaecal resection (n = 19). RESULTS: Out of 102 endoscopic findings 23 were assessed as mucosal healing. We found an association of the mucosal healing scores of the entire group both with FC-ELISA (P = 0.002) and FC-IBDoc (P = 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for FC-ELISA was 0.883 (95% confidence interval 0.807-0.960), with optimal cut-off at 136.5 μg/g. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for FC-IBDoc was 0.792 (95% confidence interval 0.688-0.895) with optimal cut-off at 48 μg/g. The FC-ELISA was more accurate than FC-IBDoc when tested by a Delong test (P = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: Standard FC-ELISA for FC evaluation is more reliable predictor of mucosal healing than the FC-IBDoc in paediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The cut-off values for both tests were incongruous.
References provided by Crossref.org