Systematic review: New serological markers (anti-glycan, anti-GP2, anti-GM-CSF Ab) in the prediction of IBD patient outcomes

Bonneau, Jessica; Dumestre-Pérard, Chantal; Rinaudo-Gaujous, Mélanie; Genin, Christian; Sparrow, Miles; Roblin, Xavier; Paul, Stéphane

doi:10.1016/j.autrev.2014.11.004

Cited by 59 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Increasing levels and amounts of different subtypes of anti-glycans correlates with early CD onset, penetrating phenotype, perianal disease, and the need for surgery (P \ 0.001) [11,12,25]. These data clearly indicate that the number and the magnitude of immune responses to different microbial antigens is positively associated with accuracy of diagnosis and severity of the disease [25]. Our recent meta-analysis, which included 14 studies, suggests similar conclusions [9].…”

Section: 'Classic' Serological Biomarkermentioning

confidence: 53%

“…While a combination of gASCA and pANCA was most accurate in differentiating CD and UC, adding ALCA and ACCA improved discrimination of IBD patients from non-IBD or CD from UC [11,12]. Increasing levels and amounts of different subtypes of anti-glycans correlates with early CD onset, penetrating phenotype, perianal disease, and the need for surgery (P \ 0.001) [11,12,25]. These data clearly indicate that the number and the magnitude of immune responses to different microbial antigens is positively associated with accuracy of diagnosis and severity of the disease [25].…”

Section: 'Classic' Serological Biomarkermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Molecular Analysis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Clinically Useful Tools for Diagnosis, Response Prediction, and Monitoring of Targeted Therapy

Jiang

2015

Mol Diagn Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomarkers of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are non-invasive or minimally invasive tests for IBD diagnosis and/or prognosis as well as assessment of disease activity and response to therapy. Here, we update the current status of IBD biomarkers, including serological, fecal, and genetic (DNA and microRNA [miRNA]) biomarkers. As an update, the classical serological biomarkers, including ASCA, pANCA, anti-OmpC, anti-Cbir, anti-I2, and other anti-glycan antibodies, are discussed only briefly. Emphasis in this article is given to those that have been recently identified or extensively characterized, as well as to the clinical utilities of biomarkers, with special attention to prediction of disease complication and activity assessment, mucosal healing, and response to therapies. In particular, we discuss the utilities of blood-based biomarkers predicting therapeutic response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, such as anti-anti-TNFα antibodies or anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and trough level of anti-TNFα. Fecal biomarkers, which have recently attracted substantial attention, are also discussed extensively, including the well-characterized calprotectin and lactoferrin, as well as the recently characterized M2-PK, CHI3L1, neopterin, MMP-9, and HMGB1. Genome and exome sequencing enables the discovery of a number of rare yet disease-defining IBD-susceptible genes, particularly those involved in very early onset IBD, providing rare yet extremely useful biomarkers at genetic levels for IBD diagnosis/prognosis. Finally, we briefly summarize the discovery, characterization, and potential implications of miRNA as potential IBD biomarkers.

show abstract

Section: 'Classic' Serological Biomarkermentioning

confidence: 53%

Section: 'Classic' Serological Biomarkermentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular Analysis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Clinically Useful Tools for Diagnosis, Response Prediction, and Monitoring of Targeted Therapy

Jiang

2015

Mol Diagn Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…www.eurojgh.com antibody could help in predicting a relapse, although more studies are required to confirm these findings [67]. Although the exact mechanism is still obscure, cigarette smoking is a well-established environmental risk factor for CD [68].…”

Section: Identifying Crohn's Disease Patients With a Poor Prognosismentioning

confidence: 98%

Maintenance therapy for Crohn’s disease

Önal

Beyazıt

Altınbaş

et al. 2015

European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic, persistent, and destructive disorder with different forms of clinical behavior and the disease appears to be progressive over the long term. Providing greater levels of mucosal healing and resolution of clinical symptoms may modify the course of CD. This will often necessitate long-term therapy with immunosuppressant or biological therapies. Both these classes of drugs have side-effects and the latter are also very expensive. Identification of a subgroup of patients with a low risk of relapse and validation of the relevant predictors in various cohort studies are the key points to be able to cease immunosuppressant and/or biological therapy in patients with CD in stable remission. The individual parameters 'mucosal healing', 'deep remission', 'fecal calprotectin', and 'C-reactive protein' or various combinations of these parameters seem to be promising tools for predicting successful withdrawal of maintenance therapy.

show abstract

“…Anti-GP2 refers to anti-GP2 IgG and anti-GP2 IgA, the former can eliminate the immune responses of GP2, while the later can improve transcytosis effect by introducing GP2-bacteria complex to M cells [26] . Anti-GP2 antibody is detected in about 21-45% of patients with CD and in 2-19% in UC [6] . Other studies have further confirmed that anti-GP2 is also associated with clinical phenotype, especially with early onset, pouchitis and pouch surgery [27] .…”

Section: Anti-glycoproteinmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, it is urgent to make accurate diagnoses and early treatment for patients with IBD. Traditionally, the diagnosis for IBD is based on clinical, radiological, endoscopic and histological criteria, which are invasive examinations and usually not accepted by patients with IBD [6] . Moreover, new biomarkers are in great need to help to diagnose uncertain cases and predict disease course and therapeutic responses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ASCA, ANCA, ALCA and Many More: Are They Useful in the Diagnosis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease?

Zhou

Song

Yang

et al. 2016

Dig Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is characterized by excessive immune responses to altered intestinal microbiota in genetically susceptible individuals. The diagnosis of IBD depends on clinical, endoscopic, histological, radiological and biochemical criteria, which may be invasive, time consuming and usually not accepted by patients with IBD. Key Messages: Serological biomarkers have been demonstrated to be a series of rapid, non-invasive approaches for assessments of early diagnosis, disease activity and prognosis for IBD. Importantly, serum antibodies against microbial antigens or auto-antigens have been used as biomarkers in predicting disease course, complications and responses to medications and surgery. Moreover, they have been demonstrated to be useful in distinguishing patients with Crohn's disease (CD) from those with ulcerative colitis (UC). Recently, a great number of new serum biomarkers (e.g., anti-glycoprotein 2, anti-granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor, anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody, anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibody, anti-laminaribioside carbohydrate IgG antibody, anti-mannobioside carbohydrate IgG antibody, antibody to the outer membrane protein of Escherichia coli, anti-CBir1) have been found to be present in patients with IBD and are potentially used in the diagnosis and prediction. The presence of these antibodies in the sera is due to the disruption of intestinal mucosa barrier and they may reflect a possibly genetic loss of immunological tolerance toward microbiota-derived antigens. Due to their non-invasive, easily accessible, repetitive and economical characteristics, these biomarkers have been found to serve as precious supplementary means in the diagnosis and disease evaluation of IBD. Conclusions: Currently, the most important utility of serological biomarkers is to evaluate the aggressive risks of disease phenotype, complications or surgery requirement, predict prognosis of the disease and distinguish CD from UC. However, they have limited values in making initially definite diagnosis for IBD. Therefore, more effective biomarkers with high sensitivity and specificity need to be further explored in the future.

show abstract

Systematic review: New serological markers (anti-glycan, anti-GP2, anti-GM-CSF Ab) in the prediction of IBD patient outcomes

Cited by 59 publications

References 96 publications

Molecular Analysis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Clinically Useful Tools for Diagnosis, Response Prediction, and Monitoring of Targeted Therapy

Molecular Analysis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Clinically Useful Tools for Diagnosis, Response Prediction, and Monitoring of Targeted Therapy

Maintenance therapy for Crohn’s disease

ASCA, ANCA, ALCA and Many More: Are They Useful in the Diagnosis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About