A recent high-value care series (MD Long, BE Sands. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 618-20) explains why “clinicians should not use IBD serologies as a test to diagnose inflammatory bowel disease.”

Here are the key points:

• “Benoir et demonstrated that a 7-marker serology panel had a lower predictive value than routine laboratory tests in diagnosis of IBD among symptomatic pediatric patients.”
• “Studies on the accuracy of these serologies for diagnosis included populations with a high prevalence of IBD (42%-62%), rather than the low-prevalence populations in primary care settings” (or even in for routine GI office visits)…”When the disease is rare, a greater proportion of the positive tests represent false positives and the PPV [positive predictive value] is low.”
• The authors also recommend against using serologies to predict a more aggressive course because “no data exist that modifications based on these serologies improve outcomes.”

My take: When I highlight this article, there is an element of confirmational bias as I have held a dim view of their value for a long time. While there is some academic interest in IBD serology results, to me, it is a disturbing trend to see patients with nonspecific abdominal pain referred who have already had these serological markers.