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
BACKGROUND Endoscopic evaluation in diagnosing and managing ulcerative colitis(UC)is becoming increasingly important.Several endoscopic scoring systems have been established,including the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic...BACKGROUND Endoscopic evaluation in diagnosing and managing ulcerative colitis(UC)is becoming increasingly important.Several endoscopic scoring systems have been established,including the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS)score and Mayo Endoscopic Subscore(MES).Furthermore,the Toronto Inflammatory Bowel Disease Global Endoscopic Reporting(TIGER)score for UC has recently been proposed;however,its clinical value remains unclear.AIM To investigate the clinical value of the TIGER score in UC by comparing it with the UCEIS score and MES.METHODS This retrospective study included 166 patients with UC who underwent total colonoscopy between January 2017 and March 2023 at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University(Qingdao,China).We retrospectively analysed endoscopic scores,laboratory and clinical data,treatment,and readmissions within 1 year.Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient,receiver operating characteristic curve,and univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows,version 26.0(IBM Corp.,Armonk,NY,United States)and GraphPad Prism version 9.0.0 for Windows(GraphPad Software,Boston,Massachusetts,United States).RESULTS The TIGER score significantly correlated with the UCEIS score and MES(r=0.721,0.626,both P<0.001),showed good differentiating values for clinical severity among mild,moderate,and severe UC[8(4-112.75)vs 210(109–219)vs 328(219–426),all P<0.001],and exhibited predictive value in diagnosing patients with severe UC[area under the curve(AUC)=0.897,P<0.001].Additionally,the TIGER(r=0.639,0,551,0.488,0.376,all P<0.001)and UCEIS scores(r=0.622,0,540,0.494,and 0.375,all P<0.001)showed stronger correlations with laboratory and clinical parameters,including C-reactive protein,erythrocyte sedimentation rate,length of hospitalisation,and hospitalisation costs,than MES(r=0.509,0,351,0.339,and 0.270,all P<0.001).The TIGER score showed the best predictability for patients'recent advanced treatment,including systemic corticosteroids,biologics,or immunomodulators(AUC=0.848,P<0.001)and 1-year readmission(AUC=0.700,P<0.001)compared with the UCEIS score(AUC=0.762,P<0.001;0.627,P<0.05)and MES(AUC=0.684,P<0.001;0.578,P=0.132).Furthermore,a TIGER score of≥317 was identified as an independent risk factor for advanced UC treatment(P=0.011).CONCLUSION The TIGER score may be superior to the UCIES score and MES in improving the accuracy of clinical disease severity assessment,guiding therapeutic decision-making,and predicting short-term prognosis.展开更多
AIM: To assess the risk of relapse in ulcerative colitis(UC) patients in clinical remission using mucosal status and fecal immunochemical test(FIT) results. METHODS: The clinical outcomes of 194 UC patients in clinica...AIM: To assess the risk of relapse in ulcerative colitis(UC) patients in clinical remission using mucosal status and fecal immunochemical test(FIT) results. METHODS: The clinical outcomes of 194 UC patients in clinical remission who underwent colonoscopy were based on evaluations of Mayo endoscopic subscores(MESs) and FIT results.RESULTS: Patients with an MES of 0(n = 94, 48%) showed a ten-fold lower risk of relapse than those with an MES of 1-3(n = 100, 52%)(HR = 0.10, 95%CI: 0.05-0.19). A negative FIT result(fecal hemoglobin concentrations ≤ 100 ng/m L) was predictive of patients with an MES of 0, with a sensitivity of 0.94 and a specific of 0.76. Moreover, patients with a negative FIT score had a six-fold lower risk of clinical relapse than those with a positive score(HR = 0.17, 95%CI: 0.10-0.28). Inclusion of the distinguishing parameter, sustaining clinical remission > 12 mo, resulted in an even stronger correlation between negative FIT results and an MES of 0 with respect to the risk of clinical relapse(HR = 0.11, 95%CI: 0.04-0.23).CONCLUSION: Negative FIT results one year or more after remission induction correlate with complete mucosal healing(MES 0) and better prognosis. Performing FIT one year after remission induction may be useful for evaluating relapse risk.展开更多
AIM To evaluate the efficacy of quantitative fecal immunochemical test(FIT) as biomarker of disease activity in ulcerative colitis(UC).METHODS Between February 2013 and November 2014, a total of 82 FIT results, obtain...AIM To evaluate the efficacy of quantitative fecal immunochemical test(FIT) as biomarker of disease activity in ulcerative colitis(UC).METHODS Between February 2013 and November 2014, a total of 82 FIT results, obtained in conjunction with colonoscopies, were retrospectivelyevaluated for 63 patients with UC. The efficacy of FIT for evaluation of disease activity was compared to colonoscopic findings. Quantitative fecal blood with automated equipment examined from collected feces. Endoscopic disease severity were assessed using the Mayo endoscopic subscore(MES) classification. The extent of disease were classified by proctitis(E1), left sided colitis(E2), and extensive colitis(E3). Clinical activity were subgrouped by remission or active.RESULTS All of 21 patients with MES 0 had negative FIT(< 7 ng/mL), but 22 patients with MES 2 or 3 had a mean FIT of > 134.89 ng/m L. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value(PPV), negative predictive value(NPV) and accuracy of negative FIT about mucosal healing were 73.33%, 81.82%, 91.49%, 51.43% and 73.17%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of predictive value of positive FIT(cutoff value > 100 ng/mL) about active disease status were 45.45%, 93.33%, 71.43%, 82.35%and 26.83%, respectively. Among patients with clinical remission, FIT was negative in 31(81.6%) of 38 cases, with a mean fecal hemoglobin concentration of 6.12 ng/mL(range, negative to 80.9 ng/mL) for this group of patients. Among patients with clinical active disease, FIT was negative in 16(36.4%) out of 44 cases, with a mean fecal hemoglobin concentration > 167.4 ng/mL for this group of patients. FIT was positively correlated with endoscopic activity(r = 0.626, P < 0.01) and clinical activity(r = 0.496, P < 0.01). But, FIT did not correlate with the extent of disease(r =-0.047, P = 0.676)CONCLUSION Quantitative FIT can be a non-invasive and effective biomarker for evaluation of clinical and endoscopic activity in UC, but not predict the extent of disease.展开更多
AIM To examine whether second generation of colon capsule endoscopy(CCE-2) is acceptable for assessing the severity of mucosal inflammation and evaluating mucosal healing using CCE-2 is able to predict outcome in ulce...AIM To examine whether second generation of colon capsule endoscopy(CCE-2) is acceptable for assessing the severity of mucosal inflammation and evaluating mucosal healing using CCE-2 is able to predict outcome in ulcerative colitis(UC) patients, especially in clinical remission.METHODS A total of 30 consecutive UC patients in clinical remission were enrolled to undergo CCE-2. Clinical remission was defined as clinical activity index(CAI) ≤ 4 according to Rachmilewitz index. The rate of total colon observation and colon cleansing level were evaluated. Severity of mucosal inflammation in UC was assessed according to the Mayo endoscopic subscore(MES) and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS). Relapsefree survival was assessed. Acceptability of CCE-2 was assessed using a questionnaire survey.RESULTS The rate of total colon observation within its battery life was 93.3%. The proportion of "excellent" plus "good" cleansing level was 73.3%. The rate of mucosal healing(MES 0, 1) assessed by CCE-2 was 77.0%. The relapse-free survival rate was significantly higher in MES 0, 1 than in MES 2, 3(P = 0.0435), and in UCEIS 0-3 than in UCEIS 4-8(P = 0.0211), whereas there was no significant difference between CAI 0 and CAI 1-4 groups. A questionnaire survey revealed an overall acceptability of CCE.CONCLUSION CCE-2 is acceptable for assessing the severity of mucosal inflammation in UC patients, especially in clinical remission. Evaluating mucosal healing using CCE-2 was able to predict outcome.展开更多
Background:The significance of endoscopic evaluation in the diagnosis and management of ulcerative colitis(UC)has been widely recognized.Over the years,scholars have established several endoscopic scores.Herein,we ass...Background:The significance of endoscopic evaluation in the diagnosis and management of ulcerative colitis(UC)has been widely recognized.Over the years,scholars have established several endoscopic scores.Herein,we assessed the clinical application value of the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore(Mayo ES),the Degree of Ulcerative Colitis Burden of Luminal Inflammation(DUBLIN)score,and the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS)score in UC patients,by comparing their correlation with disease activity and their predictive potential for treatment response and clinical outcomes.Methods:UC patients hospitalized from September 2015 to September 2019 were retrospectively analysed.We employed Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient to assess the linear association of the assessed endoscopic scores with the clinical parameters.The receiver-operating characteristic curve was applied to evaluate the predictive capabilities of the endoscopic scores for treatment escalation and 1-year readmission.Results:A total of 178 patients were enrolled;most of them(82%)suffered moderate or severe colitis.Among them,48(27%)patients received treatment escalation and 59(33%)were readmitted within 1 year.The DUBLIN and UCEIS scores demonstrated higher correlations with clinical parameters than the Mayo ES.The DUBLIN scores significantly differed between patients with mild,moderate,and severe colitis(all P<0.001).The UCEIS scores demonstrated the best predictabilities for treatment escalation and 1-year readmission with an area under the curve of 0.88 and 0.75,respectively.Compared to the UCEIS and DUBLIN scores,the predictive capabilities of the Mayo ES for treatment escalation(both P<0.001)and 1-year readmission(P<0.001 and P紏0.002,respectively)were lower.The UCEIS scores exhibited a significant difference between the steroid-responsive group and the steroid-dependent or steroid-refractory group(both P<0.001),while no significant differences in the Mayo ES and DUBLIN scores were found among the three groups(both P>0.05).Conclusion:This study demonstrates that both the DUBLIN and UCEIS scores outperform the Mayo ES in assessing disease severity and predicting treatment response and clinical outcomes in UC patients.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Clinical Medicine+X Research Project of the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University in 2021,No.QDFY+X202101036Qingdao Medical and Health Research Program in 2021,No.2021-WJZD166and Youth Project of Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province,No.ZR2020QH031.
文摘BACKGROUND Endoscopic evaluation in diagnosing and managing ulcerative colitis(UC)is becoming increasingly important.Several endoscopic scoring systems have been established,including the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS)score and Mayo Endoscopic Subscore(MES).Furthermore,the Toronto Inflammatory Bowel Disease Global Endoscopic Reporting(TIGER)score for UC has recently been proposed;however,its clinical value remains unclear.AIM To investigate the clinical value of the TIGER score in UC by comparing it with the UCEIS score and MES.METHODS This retrospective study included 166 patients with UC who underwent total colonoscopy between January 2017 and March 2023 at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University(Qingdao,China).We retrospectively analysed endoscopic scores,laboratory and clinical data,treatment,and readmissions within 1 year.Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient,receiver operating characteristic curve,and univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows,version 26.0(IBM Corp.,Armonk,NY,United States)and GraphPad Prism version 9.0.0 for Windows(GraphPad Software,Boston,Massachusetts,United States).RESULTS The TIGER score significantly correlated with the UCEIS score and MES(r=0.721,0.626,both P<0.001),showed good differentiating values for clinical severity among mild,moderate,and severe UC[8(4-112.75)vs 210(109–219)vs 328(219–426),all P<0.001],and exhibited predictive value in diagnosing patients with severe UC[area under the curve(AUC)=0.897,P<0.001].Additionally,the TIGER(r=0.639,0,551,0.488,0.376,all P<0.001)and UCEIS scores(r=0.622,0,540,0.494,and 0.375,all P<0.001)showed stronger correlations with laboratory and clinical parameters,including C-reactive protein,erythrocyte sedimentation rate,length of hospitalisation,and hospitalisation costs,than MES(r=0.509,0,351,0.339,and 0.270,all P<0.001).The TIGER score showed the best predictability for patients'recent advanced treatment,including systemic corticosteroids,biologics,or immunomodulators(AUC=0.848,P<0.001)and 1-year readmission(AUC=0.700,P<0.001)compared with the UCEIS score(AUC=0.762,P<0.001;0.627,P<0.05)and MES(AUC=0.684,P<0.001;0.578,P=0.132).Furthermore,a TIGER score of≥317 was identified as an independent risk factor for advanced UC treatment(P=0.011).CONCLUSION The TIGER score may be superior to the UCIES score and MES in improving the accuracy of clinical disease severity assessment,guiding therapeutic decision-making,and predicting short-term prognosis.
文摘AIM: To assess the risk of relapse in ulcerative colitis(UC) patients in clinical remission using mucosal status and fecal immunochemical test(FIT) results. METHODS: The clinical outcomes of 194 UC patients in clinical remission who underwent colonoscopy were based on evaluations of Mayo endoscopic subscores(MESs) and FIT results.RESULTS: Patients with an MES of 0(n = 94, 48%) showed a ten-fold lower risk of relapse than those with an MES of 1-3(n = 100, 52%)(HR = 0.10, 95%CI: 0.05-0.19). A negative FIT result(fecal hemoglobin concentrations ≤ 100 ng/m L) was predictive of patients with an MES of 0, with a sensitivity of 0.94 and a specific of 0.76. Moreover, patients with a negative FIT score had a six-fold lower risk of clinical relapse than those with a positive score(HR = 0.17, 95%CI: 0.10-0.28). Inclusion of the distinguishing parameter, sustaining clinical remission > 12 mo, resulted in an even stronger correlation between negative FIT results and an MES of 0 with respect to the risk of clinical relapse(HR = 0.11, 95%CI: 0.04-0.23).CONCLUSION: Negative FIT results one year or more after remission induction correlate with complete mucosal healing(MES 0) and better prognosis. Performing FIT one year after remission induction may be useful for evaluating relapse risk.
基金Supported by a 2-Year Research Grant of Pusan National University
文摘AIM To evaluate the efficacy of quantitative fecal immunochemical test(FIT) as biomarker of disease activity in ulcerative colitis(UC).METHODS Between February 2013 and November 2014, a total of 82 FIT results, obtained in conjunction with colonoscopies, were retrospectivelyevaluated for 63 patients with UC. The efficacy of FIT for evaluation of disease activity was compared to colonoscopic findings. Quantitative fecal blood with automated equipment examined from collected feces. Endoscopic disease severity were assessed using the Mayo endoscopic subscore(MES) classification. The extent of disease were classified by proctitis(E1), left sided colitis(E2), and extensive colitis(E3). Clinical activity were subgrouped by remission or active.RESULTS All of 21 patients with MES 0 had negative FIT(< 7 ng/mL), but 22 patients with MES 2 or 3 had a mean FIT of > 134.89 ng/m L. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value(PPV), negative predictive value(NPV) and accuracy of negative FIT about mucosal healing were 73.33%, 81.82%, 91.49%, 51.43% and 73.17%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of predictive value of positive FIT(cutoff value > 100 ng/mL) about active disease status were 45.45%, 93.33%, 71.43%, 82.35%and 26.83%, respectively. Among patients with clinical remission, FIT was negative in 31(81.6%) of 38 cases, with a mean fecal hemoglobin concentration of 6.12 ng/mL(range, negative to 80.9 ng/mL) for this group of patients. Among patients with clinical active disease, FIT was negative in 16(36.4%) out of 44 cases, with a mean fecal hemoglobin concentration > 167.4 ng/mL for this group of patients. FIT was positively correlated with endoscopic activity(r = 0.626, P < 0.01) and clinical activity(r = 0.496, P < 0.01). But, FIT did not correlate with the extent of disease(r =-0.047, P = 0.676)CONCLUSION Quantitative FIT can be a non-invasive and effective biomarker for evaluation of clinical and endoscopic activity in UC, but not predict the extent of disease.
文摘AIM To examine whether second generation of colon capsule endoscopy(CCE-2) is acceptable for assessing the severity of mucosal inflammation and evaluating mucosal healing using CCE-2 is able to predict outcome in ulcerative colitis(UC) patients, especially in clinical remission.METHODS A total of 30 consecutive UC patients in clinical remission were enrolled to undergo CCE-2. Clinical remission was defined as clinical activity index(CAI) ≤ 4 according to Rachmilewitz index. The rate of total colon observation and colon cleansing level were evaluated. Severity of mucosal inflammation in UC was assessed according to the Mayo endoscopic subscore(MES) and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS). Relapsefree survival was assessed. Acceptability of CCE-2 was assessed using a questionnaire survey.RESULTS The rate of total colon observation within its battery life was 93.3%. The proportion of "excellent" plus "good" cleansing level was 73.3%. The rate of mucosal healing(MES 0, 1) assessed by CCE-2 was 77.0%. The relapse-free survival rate was significantly higher in MES 0, 1 than in MES 2, 3(P = 0.0435), and in UCEIS 0-3 than in UCEIS 4-8(P = 0.0211), whereas there was no significant difference between CAI 0 and CAI 1-4 groups. A questionnaire survey revealed an overall acceptability of CCE.CONCLUSION CCE-2 is acceptable for assessing the severity of mucosal inflammation in UC patients, especially in clinical remission. Evaluating mucosal healing using CCE-2 was able to predict outcome.
基金supported by grants from the National Nature Science Foundation of China[grant number 81970461,81800496]the Qingdao Science and Technology Project[grant number 3199].
文摘Background:The significance of endoscopic evaluation in the diagnosis and management of ulcerative colitis(UC)has been widely recognized.Over the years,scholars have established several endoscopic scores.Herein,we assessed the clinical application value of the Mayo Endoscopic Subscore(Mayo ES),the Degree of Ulcerative Colitis Burden of Luminal Inflammation(DUBLIN)score,and the Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity(UCEIS)score in UC patients,by comparing their correlation with disease activity and their predictive potential for treatment response and clinical outcomes.Methods:UC patients hospitalized from September 2015 to September 2019 were retrospectively analysed.We employed Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient to assess the linear association of the assessed endoscopic scores with the clinical parameters.The receiver-operating characteristic curve was applied to evaluate the predictive capabilities of the endoscopic scores for treatment escalation and 1-year readmission.Results:A total of 178 patients were enrolled;most of them(82%)suffered moderate or severe colitis.Among them,48(27%)patients received treatment escalation and 59(33%)were readmitted within 1 year.The DUBLIN and UCEIS scores demonstrated higher correlations with clinical parameters than the Mayo ES.The DUBLIN scores significantly differed between patients with mild,moderate,and severe colitis(all P<0.001).The UCEIS scores demonstrated the best predictabilities for treatment escalation and 1-year readmission with an area under the curve of 0.88 and 0.75,respectively.Compared to the UCEIS and DUBLIN scores,the predictive capabilities of the Mayo ES for treatment escalation(both P<0.001)and 1-year readmission(P<0.001 and P紏0.002,respectively)were lower.The UCEIS scores exhibited a significant difference between the steroid-responsive group and the steroid-dependent or steroid-refractory group(both P<0.001),while no significant differences in the Mayo ES and DUBLIN scores were found among the three groups(both P>0.05).Conclusion:This study demonstrates that both the DUBLIN and UCEIS scores outperform the Mayo ES in assessing disease severity and predicting treatment response and clinical outcomes in UC patients.
