Systematic review and external validation of prediction models based on symptoms and biomarkers for identifying endoscopic activity in Crohn's disease
Dutch Initiative on Crohn and Colitis (ICC)
(2020) Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, volume 18, issue 8, pp. 1704 - 1718
(Article)
Abstract
Background & AimsEndoscopic healing, an important target of treatment for Crohn’s disease (CD), requires ileocolonoscopy, which is costly and burdensome. We investigated whether published noninvasive models (based on symptoms and biomarkers) to evaluate CD activity have sufficient accuracy to replace ileocolonoscopy. MethodsWe performed a systematic review of published noninvasive diagnostic
... read more
models to evaluate CD activity that used endoscopic features of activity (endoscopic activity) or healing as the reference standard. We externally validated these models for the outcome endoscopic activity (CD endoscopic index of severity scores, ≥3) using data from the a randomized controlled trial investigating tailored treatment with infliximab for active luminal Crohn's disease (TAILORIX) study (346 ileocolonoscopies in 155 patients) and the Utrecht Activity Index (UAI) study (93 ileocolonoscopies in 82 patients). We calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for the models using data from these studies, and compared the performance of these models against measurements of fecal calprotectin (FC) and C-reactive protein (CRP). ResultsWe screened 5303 articles and identified 27 models (from 21 studies) for our analysis. Seven models could be validated externally; in the TAILORIX data set, these models identified patients with endoscopic activity with AUROC values ranging from 0.61 (95% CI, 0.51–0.70) to 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76–0.86). In this data set, the AUROC value for FC concentration was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.74–0.85) and the AUROC value for CRP level was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.66–0.77). The AUROC values for the validation in the UAI data set were similar. In the TAILORIX and/or UAI data set, 4 of the 7 models, as well as the FC and CRP assays, were able to identify patients with endoscopic activity with positive predictive values of 90% or more. Two of the 7 models (but not the FC or CRP values) identified patients without endoscopic activity with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 90% or more, leading to correct prediction of endoscopic healing in 3.2% to 11.3% of all patients. For example, applying the Herranz–Bachiller model (1 of 7 models) at a NPV of 92.1% and a positive predictive value of 91.9% correctly identified 35.7% of all patients in whom ileocolonoscopy could be avoided for expected endoscopic activity or healing but incorrectly identified 3.2% of all patients. Most ileocolonoscopies (66.5% in TAILORIX and 72.6% in the UAI of all ileocolonoscopies) could be avoided correctly based on concentrations of FC of 100 μg/g or less and 250 μg/g or higher. However, using this range of FC concentrations to identify patients who do not require ileocolonoscopy caused 18.7% of all patients in the TAILORIX cohort and 19.8% of all patients in the UAI cohort to be predicted incorrectly to have endoscopic activity or healing. ConclusionsIn a systematic review and external validation of noninvasive models to identify patients with endoscopic activity of CD, we found only 2 of 7 models evaluated to have NPVs of 90% or more, however, leading to correctly predicted EH in only a small proportion of patients. Ileocolonoscopy therefore remains the mainstay to evaluate CD mucosal disease activity and healing.
show less
Download/Full Text
The full text of this publication is not available.
Keywords: Colonoscopy, IBD, PPV, Response to Therapy, Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Review, Journal Article
ISSN: 1542-3565
Publisher: W.B. Saunders Ltd
Note: Funding Information: The authors would like to thank the following researchers for providing additional data about their original publications: Y. Bosi, M. de Bruyn, E. Domènech, P. Eder, M.T. Herranz Bachiller, M.-A. Meuwis, P. Miranda-García, S. Nancey, G. Opdenakker, J. Panés, J.C. Preiss, E. Stragier, and A. Viscido. None received compensation outside of their usual salary. Conflicts of interest These authors disclose the following: Eelco C. Brand is supported by the Alexandre Suerman program for MD and PhD candidates of the University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands, and is a co-applicant of an Investigator Initiated Research Grant from Pfizer; Itta M. Minderhoud has served on an advisory panel of Ferring; Filip J. Baert has received research grants from AbbVie, Chiesi, Ipsen, Mundipharma, Roche, and Takeda, and speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Cellgene, Ferring, Janssen, Mundipharma, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, and Vifor; David Laharie has received board and lecture fees from AbbVie, Biogaran, Biogen, Ferring, HAC-Pharma, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, Roche, Takeda, Theradiag, and Tillots; Peter Bossuyt has received educational grants from AbbVie, Mundipharma, Pfizer, and Janssen, speaker fees from AbbVie, Takeda, and Pfizer; and advisory board fees from Hospira, Janssen, MSD, Mundipharma, Roche, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda, and AbbVie; Anthony Buisson has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Hospira, and Takeda, and lecture fees from AbbVie, Hospira, Takeda, MSD, Vifor Pharma, Sanofi-Aventis, and Ferring; Edouard Louis has received research grants from Takeda, Pfizer, and Janssen, educational grants from AbbVie, MSD, Takeda, and Janssen, speaker fees from AbbVie, Ferring, MSD, Falk, Takeda, Hospira, Janssen, and Pfizer, has served on the advisory boards of AbbVie, Ferring, MSD, Takeda, Celgene, Hospira, Janssen, and Pfizer, and has consulted for AbbVie; Benjamin Pariente has received board and lecture fees from AbbVie, Biogaran, Ferring, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, and Lilly; C. Janneke van der Woude has received grants from AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Tramedico, and Falk, speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Mundipharma, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, and Vifor; Geert R. A. M. D'Haens has served as an advisor for AbbVie, Ablynx, Allergan, Amakem, Amgen, AM Pharma, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Avaxia, Biogen, Bristol Meiers Squibb, Boerhinger Ingelheim, Celgene/Receptos, Celltrion, Cosmo, Covidien/Medtronics, Ferring, DrFALK Pharma, Eli Lilly, Engene, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, Glaxo Smith Kline, Hospira/Pfizer, Immunic, Johnson and Johnson, Lycera, Medimetrics, Millenium/Takeda, Mitsubishi Pharma, Merck Sharp Dome, Mundipharma, Nextbiotics, Novonordisk, Otsuka, Pfizer/Hospira, Photopill, Prometheus Laboratories/Nestle, Progenity, Protagonist, Robarts Clinical Trials, Salix, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Seres/Nestle, Setpoint, Shire, Teva, Tigenix, Tillotts, Topivert, Versant, and Vifor, and has received speaker fees from AbbVie, Biogen, Ferring, Johnson and Johnson, Merck Sharp Dome, Mundipharma, Norgine, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Shire, Millenium/Takeda, Tillotts, and Vifor; Séverine Vermeire is a senior clinical researcher of the Research Foundation Flanders, has received grant support from MSD, AbbVie, Pfizer, J&J, and Takeda, has received lecture fees from AbbVie, MSD, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Hospira, Tillotts, and J&J, and has received consultancy fees from AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Shire Pharmaceuticals Group, MSD, Tillotts, Prodigest, Ablynx, Robarts Clinical Trials, Prometheus, Progenity, Hospira, Mundipharma, Celgene, Galapagos, and Genentech/Roche; and Bas Oldenburg has received grants from MSD, AbbVie, Takeda, Cablon, Ferring, Falk, and Pfizer. The remaining authors disclose no conflicts. Funding Eelco C. Brand is supported by the Alexandre Suerman program for MD and PhD candidates of the University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Funding Information: Funding Eelco C. Brand is supported by the Alexandre Suerman program for MD and PhD candidates of the University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 AGA Institute
(Peer reviewed)