Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L'Aquila, Piazza S. Tommasi, Coppito, L'Aquila, Italy.
Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2017 Dec 19;24(1):78-92. doi: 10.1093/ibd/izx011.
Current noninvasive methods for assessing intestinal inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remain unsatisfactory. Along with C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate, fecal calprotectin (FC) is the standard test for assessing IBD activity, even though its specificity and accuracy are not optimal and it lacks a validated cutoff. Over the past few decades, several fecal markers released from intestinal inflammatory cells have been investigated in IBD; they are the subject of this systematic review.
A systematic electronic search of the English literature up to April 2017 was performed using Medline and the Cochrane Library. Only papers written in English that analyzed fecal biomarkers in IBD were included. In vitro studies, animal studies, studies on blood/serum samples, and studies analyzing FC or fecal lactoferrin alone were excluded.
Out of 1023 citations, 125 eligible studies were identified. Data were grouped according to each fecal marker including S100A12, high-mobility group box 1, neopterin, polymorphonuclear neutrophil elastase, fecal hemoglobin, alpha1-antitrypsin, human neutrophil peptides, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, chitinase 3-like-1, matrix metalloproteinase 9, lysozyme, M2-pyruvate kinase, myeloperoxidase, fecal eosinophil proteins, human beta-defensin-2, and beta-glucuronidase. Some of these markers showed a high sensitivity and specificity and correlated with disease activity, response to therapy, and mucosal healing. Furthermore, they showed a potential utility in the prediction of clinical relapse.
Several fecal biomarkers have the potential to become useful tools complementing FC in IBD diagnosis and monitoring. However, wide variability in their accuracy in assessment of intestinal inflammation suggests the need for further studies.
目前用于评估炎症性肠病(IBD)肠道炎症的非侵入性方法仍不尽人意。尽管粪便钙卫蛋白(FC)是评估 IBD 活动的标准检测,但与 C 反应蛋白和红细胞沉降率一样,其特异性和准确性都不是最佳的,而且缺乏验证的截断值。在过去几十年中,人们研究了几种从肠道炎症细胞释放的粪便标志物用于 IBD,这是本系统综述的主题。
对截至 2017 年 4 月的英文文献进行了系统的电子检索,使用了 Medline 和 Cochrane 图书馆。只纳入了分析 IBD 粪便生物标志物的英文论文。排除了体外研究、动物研究、血液/血清样本研究以及仅分析 FC 或粪便乳铁蛋白的研究。
从 1023 篇引文中共确定了 125 篇符合条件的研究。根据每个粪便标志物进行分组,包括 S100A12、高迁移率族蛋白 1、新蝶呤、中性粒细胞弹性蛋白酶、粪便血红蛋白、α1-抗胰蛋白酶、人中性粒细胞肽、中性粒细胞明胶酶相关脂质运载蛋白、几丁质酶 3 样蛋白 1、基质金属蛋白酶 9、溶菌酶、M2-丙酮酸激酶、髓过氧化物酶、粪便嗜酸性粒细胞蛋白、人β-防御素-2 和β-葡糖苷酸酶。其中一些标志物具有较高的敏感性和特异性,并与疾病活动、治疗反应和黏膜愈合相关。此外,它们在预测临床复发方面具有潜在的应用价值。
几种粪便生物标志物有可能成为 FC 用于 IBD 诊断和监测的有用工具。然而,它们在评估肠道炎症方面的准确性存在很大差异,这表明需要进一步的研究。