Mosli Mahmoud H, Parker Claire E, Nelson Sigrid A, Baker Kenneth A, MacDonald John K, Zou G Y, Feagan Brian G, Khanna Reena, Levesque Barrett G, Jairath Vipul
King Abdulaziz University Hospital, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Robarts Clinical Trials, Robarts Research Institute, P.O. Box 5015, 100 Perth Drive, London, ON, Canada, N6A 5K8.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 25;5(5):CD011256. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011256.pub2.
Disease activity can be determined using clinical, endoscopic or histologic criteria in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Persistent disease activity is associated with poor outcomes. Histologic disease activity has been shown to be associated with relapse, colectomy and colorectal cancer. The ability to objectively evaluate microscopic disease activity using histology is important for both clinical practice and clinical trials. However, the operating properties of the currently available histologic indices remain unclear.
A systematic review was undertaken to identify and evaluate the development and operating characteristics of histologic disease activity indices used to assess disease activity in people with ulcerative colitis.
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD Review Group Specialized Trials Register from inception to 2 December 2016 for applicable studies. There were no language or document type restrictions.
Any study design (e.g. randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case series) that evaluated a histologic index in patients with UC were considered for inclusion. Eligible patients were adults (> 18 years), diagnosed with UC using conventional clinical, radiographic, endoscopic and histologic criteria.
Two authors (MHM and CEP) independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of the studies identified from the literature search. A standardized form was used to assess eligibility of trials for inclusion and for data extraction.Two authors (MHM and CEP) independently extracted and recorded data, which included the number of patients enrolled, number of patients per treatment arm, patient characteristics including age and gender distribution, and the name of the histologic index. Outcomes (i.e. intra-rater reliability, inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, content validity, criterion validity, construct validity, responsiveness, and feasibility) were recorded for each trial.
In total, 126 reports describing 30 scoring indices were identified through the screening process. Eleven of the 30 scoring indices have undergone some form of index validation. Intra-rater reliability was assessed for eight scoring indices. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated for all 11 of the scoring indices. Three of the indices underwent content validation. Two of the included scoring indices assessed criterion validity. Six of the included scoring indices explored content validity. Two of the included scoring indices were tested for responsiveness.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The Nancy Index and the Robarts Histopathology Index have undergone the most validation in that four operating properties including reliability, content validity, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity have been tested. However, none of the currently available histologic scoring indices have been fully validated. In order to determine the optimal endpoint for histologic healing in UC, more research is required. The optimal index would need to be fully validated.
可使用临床、内镜或组织学标准来判定溃疡性结肠炎(UC)患者的疾病活动度。持续性疾病活动与不良预后相关。组织学疾病活动已被证明与复发、结肠切除术及结直肠癌有关。利用组织学客观评估微观疾病活动度的能力对于临床实践和临床试验均很重要。然而,目前可用的组织学指数的操作特性仍不明确。
进行一项系统评价,以识别和评估用于评估溃疡性结肠炎患者疾病活动度的组织学疾病活动指数的开发及操作特征。
我们检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE、PubMed、CENTRAL以及Cochrane IBD综述小组专门试验注册库,检索时间从建库至2016年12月2日,以查找适用的研究。没有语言或文献类型限制。
任何评估UC患者组织学指数的研究设计(如随机对照试验、队列研究、病例系列)均被考虑纳入。符合条件的患者为成年人(>18岁),使用传统临床、影像学、内镜及组织学标准诊断为UC。
两位作者(MHM和CEP)独立审查了文献检索中识别出的研究的标题和摘要。使用标准化表格评估试验纳入的资格及进行数据提取。两位作者(MHM和CEP)独立提取并记录数据,包括入组患者数量、每个治疗组的患者数量、患者特征(包括年龄和性别分布)以及组织学指数的名称。记录每个试验的结局(即评分者内信度、评分者间信度、内部一致性、内容效度、标准效度、结构效度、反应度和可行性)。
通过筛选过程共识别出126篇描述30个评分指数的报告。30个评分指数中的11个已进行了某种形式的指数验证。对8个评分指数评估了评分者内信度。对所有11个评分指数评估了评分者间信度。其中3个指数进行了内容效度验证。纳入的评分指数中有2个评估了标准效度。纳入的评分指数中有6个探讨了内容效度。纳入的评分指数中有2个测试了反应度。
南希指数和罗伯茨组织病理学指数经过的验证最多,因为已经测试了包括信度、内容效度、结构效度(假设检验)和标准效度在内的四个操作特性。然而,目前可用的组织学评分指数均未得到充分验证。为了确定UC组织学愈合的最佳终点,需要更多的研究。最佳指数需要得到充分验证。