BACKGROUND Although the usefulness of endoscopic scores,such as the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore(MES),Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS),and Ulcerative Colitis Colonoscopic Index of Severity(UCCIS),and...BACKGROUND Although the usefulness of endoscopic scores,such as the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore(MES),Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS),and Ulcerative Colitis Colonoscopic Index of Severity(UCCIS),and biomarkers such as fecal calprotectin(FC)for predicting relapse in ulcerative colitis(UC)has been reported,few studies have included endoscopic scores for evaluating the entire colon.AIM To compare the usefulness of FC value and MES,UCEIS,and UCCIS for predicting relapse in patients with UC in clinical remission.METHODS In total,75 patients with UC in clinical and endoscopic remission who visited our institution between February 2019 and March 2022 were enrolled.The diagnosis of UC was confirmed based on the clinical presentation,endoscopic findings,and histology,according to the current established criteria for UC.Fecal samples were collected the day before or after the colonoscopy for measurement of FC.Endoscopic evaluations were performed using MES,UCEIS,and UCCIS.The primary outcome measure of this study was the assessment of the association between relapse within 12 mo and MES,UCEIS,UCCIS,and FC.The secondary outcome was the comparison between endoscopic scores and biomarkers in en-rolled patients with UC with mucosal healing.RESULTSFC and UCCIS showed a significant correlation with UCEIS (r = 0.537, P < 0.001 and r = 0.957, P < 0.001, respectively).Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for predicting MES 0 showed that the area under the curve ofUCCIS was significantly higher than that of FC (P < 0.01). During the 1-year observation period, 18 (24%) patientsexperienced a relapse, and both the FC and UCCIS of the relapse group were significantly higher than that of theremission group. The cut-off values for predicting relapse were set at FC = 323 mg/kg and UCCIS = 10.2. The areaunder the curve of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for predicting relapse did not show a significantdifference between FC and UCCIS. The accuracy of the endoscopic scores and biomarkers in predicting relapse was86.7% for UCCIS, 85.3% for UCEIS, 76.0% for FC, and 73.3% for MES.CONCLUSIONThe three endoscopic scores and FC may predict UC relapse during clinical remission. Among these scores, UCEISmay be the most useful in terms of ease of evaluation and accuracy.展开更多
AIM: To investigate into the diversity of UGT1A1 polymorphism across three different districts in Japan and highlight genetic differences among the population in Japan. METHODS: We enrolled 50 healthy volunteers from ...AIM: To investigate into the diversity of UGT1A1 polymorphism across three different districts in Japan and highlight genetic differences among the population in Japan. METHODS: We enrolled 50 healthy volunteers from each of the Yamaguchi (western part of Japan), Kochi(southern part of Japan) and Akita (northern part of Japan) prefectures. Blood samples (7 mL) were collected from each participant and stored in EDTA for subsequent genotyping by fragment size analysis, direct sequencing and TaqMan assay of UGT1A1*28, UGT1A7*3/UGT1A9*22 and UGT1A1*93/UGT1A1*6/ UGT1A1*27/UGT1A1*60/UGT1A7 (-57), respectively. RESULTS: The only statistically significant differences in allele polymorphisms among the group examined were for UGT1A1*6. The Akita population showed more UGT1A1*6 heterozygosity (P = 0.0496). CONCLUSION: Our study revealed no regional diversity among UGT1A1, UGT1A7 or UGT1A9 polymorphisms in Japan.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND Although the usefulness of endoscopic scores,such as the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore(MES),Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS),and Ulcerative Colitis Colonoscopic Index of Severity(UCCIS),and biomarkers such as fecal calprotectin(FC)for predicting relapse in ulcerative colitis(UC)has been reported,few studies have included endoscopic scores for evaluating the entire colon.AIM To compare the usefulness of FC value and MES,UCEIS,and UCCIS for predicting relapse in patients with UC in clinical remission.METHODS In total,75 patients with UC in clinical and endoscopic remission who visited our institution between February 2019 and March 2022 were enrolled.The diagnosis of UC was confirmed based on the clinical presentation,endoscopic findings,and histology,according to the current established criteria for UC.Fecal samples were collected the day before or after the colonoscopy for measurement of FC.Endoscopic evaluations were performed using MES,UCEIS,and UCCIS.The primary outcome measure of this study was the assessment of the association between relapse within 12 mo and MES,UCEIS,UCCIS,and FC.The secondary outcome was the comparison between endoscopic scores and biomarkers in en-rolled patients with UC with mucosal healing.RESULTSFC and UCCIS showed a significant correlation with UCEIS (r = 0.537, P < 0.001 and r = 0.957, P < 0.001, respectively).Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for predicting MES 0 showed that the area under the curve ofUCCIS was significantly higher than that of FC (P < 0.01). During the 1-year observation period, 18 (24%) patientsexperienced a relapse, and both the FC and UCCIS of the relapse group were significantly higher than that of theremission group. The cut-off values for predicting relapse were set at FC = 323 mg/kg and UCCIS = 10.2. The areaunder the curve of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for predicting relapse did not show a significantdifference between FC and UCCIS. The accuracy of the endoscopic scores and biomarkers in predicting relapse was86.7% for UCCIS, 85.3% for UCEIS, 76.0% for FC, and 73.3% for MES.CONCLUSIONThe three endoscopic scores and FC may predict UC relapse during clinical remission. Among these scores, UCEISmay be the most useful in terms of ease of evaluation and accuracy.
基金Supported by The Non-profit Epidemiological and Clinical Research Information Network Organization
文摘AIM: To investigate into the diversity of UGT1A1 polymorphism across three different districts in Japan and highlight genetic differences among the population in Japan. METHODS: We enrolled 50 healthy volunteers from each of the Yamaguchi (western part of Japan), Kochi(southern part of Japan) and Akita (northern part of Japan) prefectures. Blood samples (7 mL) were collected from each participant and stored in EDTA for subsequent genotyping by fragment size analysis, direct sequencing and TaqMan assay of UGT1A1*28, UGT1A7*3/UGT1A9*22 and UGT1A1*93/UGT1A1*6/ UGT1A1*27/UGT1A1*60/UGT1A7 (-57), respectively. RESULTS: The only statistically significant differences in allele polymorphisms among the group examined were for UGT1A1*6. The Akita population showed more UGT1A1*6 heterozygosity (P = 0.0496). CONCLUSION: Our study revealed no regional diversity among UGT1A1, UGT1A7 or UGT1A9 polymorphisms in Japan.
