Tag Archives: Crohn’s disease

How sensitive is Calprotectin?

Posted on by

A recent article suggests that fecal calprotectin, while good, is not as good as endoscopy at detecting mucosal disease in pediatric Crohn’s disease (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18: 1493-97).

In this study, 60 consecutive children with new onset untreated Crohn’s disease (diagnosis based on Porto criteria -JPGN 2005; 41: 1-7) were enrolled in ESPGHAN growth study.  The data for this study was collected prospectively (21 investigators from multiple sites).  The calprotectin values were obtained prior to treatment.

Median fecal calprotectin values were 2198 μg/g in patients with isolated small bowel disease; this did not differ significantly from the value of 2400 μg/g in patients with colonic disease (with or without small bowel disease).

Fecal calprotectin was elevated in 95% of patients; this outperformed CRP (86%) and ESR (83%) as a marker for Crohn’s disease.  In the three children with normal calprotectin values, the serum inflammatory markers were normal in all three and two had minimal endoscopic findings.  The histology findings for these three children were not reported.

In my experience, fecal calprotectin has been very useful as a marker for Crohn’s disease and has helped identify some atypical cases by increasing my clinical suspicion.  I have had two patients with high calprotectin values who had normal-appearing mucosa with panendoscopy; they both had small bowel (jejunal) Crohn’s disease; one of these patients did have granulomas identified histologically.

While I realize that no test is perfect, I think additional studies are warranted to determine the actual sensitivity of this test for Crohn’s disease.  The sensitivity of calprotectin may yet be higher than the 95% reported in this study.

Related posts:

Biomarkers identify patients who benefit and how  Multiple additional calprotectin references with this link

Abatacept for IBD?

Posted on by

Doesn’t work (Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 62-69).  While this study indicates that Abatacept was not effect for either Crohn’s disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), it was useful nevertheless.

In brief, the study examined four placebo-controlled trials of abatacept for induction and maintenance therapy in both CD and UC.  The induction studies included 451 CD patients and 490 UC patients.  The maintenance studies had 90 CD and 131 UC patients.

Results for induction:

  • CD: Clinical response: 17%, 10%, 15% for abatacept dosing of 30, 10, and 3 mg/kg.  Placebo 14%
  • UC: 21%, 19%, 20%  for abatacept dosing of 30, 10, and 3 mg/kg.  Placebo 29.5%

Results for maintenance:

  • CD: 24% abatacept vs 11% placebo
  • UC: 12.5% vs 14% placebo

The premise of this study was that T-cell activation requires co-stimulatory signaling via T cell CD28 and CD80 or CD86 on the antigen-presenting cell.  Abatacept (CTLA4-Ig) which is effective for psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis was thought to have potential; it blocks costimulation pathways involved in T-cell activation which was shown to be helpful in animal model of colitis.

So why did it not work?  The editorial in the same volume (pages 13-16) suggests the following possibilities:

  • Abatacept would be more likely to work when naive T cells are actively recruited into inflammation rather than memory T cells which are predominant in IBD
  • CD28-related pathways may not be important in IBD pathogenesis
  • Abatacept may have impeded Treg function in addition to preventing T-cell activation (explained in Fig 1D)
  • Blockade of CD28 pathways could have resulted in unfavorable changes in cytokine profiles from T-cell differentiation (Th1 vs Th2)

The implication of this study is that not all T-cell mediated inflammatory disease respond to the same treatment approaches.  The complexity of intestinal immune responses necessitates ongoing clinical studies to determine which promising therapies will be useful.

What is the GRADE of GM-CSF in IBD?

Posted on by

I was not familiar with the acronym “GRADE” which refers to an analysis by Cochrane review:

Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

With regard to Sargramostim (GM-CSF), GRADE analysis indicates that GM-CSF does not appear more effective than placebo for Crohn’s disease (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18: 1333-39).

Three randomized studies were examined with 537 patients.  Clinical remission was achieved in 25.3% of GM-CSF patients compared with 17.5% of placebo-treated patients (p=0.17).  Clinical response (100-point CDAI score drop) was noted in 38.3% of GM-CSF group compared with 24.8% of placebo group (p=0.06).  Adverse effects were not statistically different either.

In my view, there are probably populations of IBD patients who will be benefit from GM-CSF.  The difficulty is identifying which groups.

Additional references:

  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 28, 208.  GM-CSF receptor (CD116) defective expression & function in 85% of IBD pts. n=52.
  • -NEJM 2005; 352: 2193. Leukine decreased Crohn’s dz severity: 48% c decrease in CDAI of >100 (vs 26% placebo). injection & bone pain -common; 3 pts (n=81 in leukine group) c serious rxns- migraine, weakness/lethargy, R-sided weakness (?demyelinating d/o)
  • -Lancet 2002; 360: 1478-1481. use of GM-CSF for Crohn’s.

More on IBD medicine risks

Posted on by

As noted in a recent post (Assessing and discussing risk of lymphoma in IBD), diagrams can be useful to convey the absolute risks for IBD medicines; this risk is often poorly understood by patients and their families. Two articles add additional insight that may help with counseling. (Thanks to Ben Gold for forwarding these articles.)

  • Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 964-70.
  • Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1051-63.

The first article reviews the risk of lymphoma with regard to inflammatory bowel disease treatment decisions.  Important points in this article include the following:

1. Relative risks may appear large while absolute risk may be quite low.  The estimate for absolute risk for lymphoma:

  • For azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine: 1 additional case for every 4357 persons treated
  • For anti-TNF (infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab): 1 additional case for every 2380 persons treated between ages 20-29.

2. Framing the discussion with regards to risk of continued active disease, continued exposure to steroids, and potential need for surgery can be helpful:

  • “It would take only three patients discontinuing their azathioprine to cause one additional relapse of IBD per year”
  • Seven patients stopping anti-TNF therapy would result in an additional hospitalization each year and 14 patients stopping anti-TNF therapy would result in an additional abdominal surgery each year
  • While the ‘relative risks of lymphoma associated with these medications may sound inappropriately large…A more appropriate comparison is the absolute risk of lymphoma versus the absolute risk of active/untreated disease or corticosteroid therapy.’  An example: if 2000 patients with IBD took one of these medications (eg. anti-TNF agent), probably one patient will develop a lymphoma; however, if none of those patients took an anti-TNF agent, it would result in more than 100 hospitalizations and nearly 60 surgeries.

3. “Patients can also be very sensitive to numerators and pay relatively insufficient attention to denominators.” This has been called “anchoring and adjustment” or “base-rate neglect.”  This issue has to do with “numeracy;” this is defined as the basic math skill needed for health-related activities. To help families, consider the following:

  • avoid labels such as “very low” when describing risk
  • use absolute risk data
  • use similar denominators when comparing risks
  • use visual aids

The second study cited is a pooled analysis of infections, malignancy, and mortality risks associated with infliximab and immunomodulator treatment in adult IBD patients.  This study collected safety data from 10 previous trials.  Five of these trials were randomized, controlled studies.  Table 3 and Table 4 detail extensive safety data for immunomodulators (eg. azathioprine) and for infliximab respectively.

With regard to immunomodulators, the combined studies enrolled 947 on immunomodulators in comparison to 1170 without immunomodulators.  With ulcerative colitis (UC) patients but not with Crohn’s disease (CD), immunomodulator use increased the risk of infections (120/100 patient years versus 92.5 among placebo-treated patients).  CD patients, but not UC patients, had an increased risk of malignancy with immunomodulator use (1.84/100 patient years compared with 0/100 patient years in the control group).  With the exception of the SONIC study, use of immunomodulator was not randomly assigned.  So, some of the increased risk in these patients could be due to having more severe IBD rather than due to the medication.

With regard to infliximab, and in contradiction to the previous article’s estimated risks, infliximab treatment did not appear to affect the incidence of infection, mortality, or malignancy.  This study and several others have not demonstrated an increased risk of malignancy with infliximab. This could be that even with this pooled data it is difficult to detect a rare adverse outcome.  More prospective studies and more long-term followup will be needed to truly determine the risk.

While it is known that these agents may increase the risk of some infections, the limited increase in infections which was detected only with immunomodulator use in UC is likely due to a lowered risk of infection when active inflammatory bowel disease is controlled.  A much bigger risk factor for infection is the use of corticosteroids.  When effective IBD medications are administered, this helps control inflammation and allows tapering of corticosteroids.

Related posts:

TNF-α antagonists and infections

Disease modifying treatment in IBD

Only one chance to make first impression

Delays in diagnosing Crohn’s disease

Posted on by

Delayed diagnosis remains a problem in Crohn’s disease (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18: 496-505).  This study included a total of 1591 IBD patients (932 CD, 625 UC, 34 indeterminate colitis) from the Swiss IBD cohort study (SIBDCS).

  • Diagnostic delay in CD patients was significantly longer compared to UC patients (median 9 versus 4 months, P < 0.001).
  • 75% of CD patients were diagnosed within 24 months compared to 12 months for UC and 6 months for IC patients.
  •  Independent risk factors for long diagnostic delay in CD (>24 months)  included age <40 years at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] 2.15, P = 0.010) and ileal disease (OR 1.69, P = 0.025)
  • In UC patients, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID intake (OR 1.75, P = 0.093) and male gender (OR 0.59, P = 0.079) were associated with long diagnostic delay (>12 months)

Diagnostic delay has been a problem for quite a long time; in children, delays can worsen growth failure.  In 1988, Kanof et al reported that decreased height velocity preceded the diagnosis of CD in 88% of their patients (pediatric cohort). In addition, 42% of their population had a reduction in height velocity before intestinal symptoms were noted.

Especially when there is not a lot of colonic disease, a high degree of suspicion needs to be maintained.  This is not difficult for pediatric gastroenterologists.  For pediatricians and family physicians, the increased availability of biomarkers (Biomarkers identify patients who benefit and how) should be helpful in reducing diagnostic delays.

Additional blog entries and references:

  • Kanof ME, Lake AM, Bayless TM. Decreased height velocity in children and adolescents before the diagnosis of Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology.1988; 95 :1523– 1527.
  • Differentiating ulcerative colitis from Crohn disease in children and young adults: report of a working group of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America.  North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Colitis Foundation of America, Bousvaros A, Antonioli DA, Colletti RB, Dubinsky MC, Glickman JN, Gold BD, Griffiths AM, Jevon GP, et al.J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2007 May; 44(5):653-74.

Upper endoscopy useful for identifying Crohn’s disease

Posted on by

In a large pediatric study, the value of upper endoscopy in detecting Crohn’s disease (CD) is evident (JPGN 2012: 54: 753-57).

While the majority of pediatric patients with suspected inflammatory bowel disease probably undergo both upper endoscopy and colonoscopy, the added value of upper endoscopy remains unclear.  In this retrospective study with 171 pediatric patients (70 with CD, 33 with UC, 68 Non-IBD), 11% of children with CD had the diagnosis established based “solely” on the finding of granulomatous inflammation in upper intestinal tract (along with clinical symptoms).

Other key findings:

  • Presence of histologic gastric inflammation in CD patients compared to control patients was significantly higher (p<0.0001) but not significantly higher compared to UC patients (p=0.19).
  • Duodenal inflammation was highly suggestive of CD compared with both UC and non-IBD patients.  This occurred in 19% of CD patients compared with 0% and 1% in the other groups respectively.
  • 21 children (30%) had granulomas identified in upper GI tract (19 in stomach).  In 8 (11%), the diagnosis was changed based on this finding.  Prior to histology, the tenative diagnosis: 2 UC, 4 IC, 2 non-IBD.
One curious finding was a the presence of “perianal abscess/fistula” with similar frequency in CD patients and UC patients based on their Table 2 Patient Characteristics.
Additional references:
  • -IBD 2009; 15: 1101-4.  Presence of UGI disease in IBD.
  • -JPGN 2007; 44: 653.  NASPGHAN report on discriminating/labelling UC vs. Crohn’s.
  • -JPGN 2002; 35: 636-40. Advocates panendoscopy for all new IBD.  Granulomas in 28% of EGDs & 71% of UC pts c some abnl on EGD; 82% Crohn’s c abnl EGD.
  • -JPGN 2005; 41: abstract 181 (page 549).  UGI identified granulomas in 15% that were not identified elsewhere.
  • -JPGN 2004; 39: 257-61. Diagnostic role of EGD for pediatric IBD.
  • Magnetic resonance enterography for Crohn’s disease

Quantifying Risk of PML with Natalizumab

Posted on by

Given the limited number of treatment options for inflammatory bowel disease, when Natalizumab became available, there was a great deal of enthusiasm.  This quickly diminished as reports of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) emerged.  So far, I have not prescribed this agent.

Due to its efficacy for multiple sclerosis and IBD, there has been continued interest in understanding the risk for PML (NEJM 2012; 366: 1870-80, editorial pg 1938-39).

Key findings:

  • 212 cases of PML among 99,571 patients treated with natalizumab (2.1 cases per 1000)
  • Three main risk factors: positive JC-virus antibody, previous use of immunosuppressants, and receiving natalizumab more than 2 years

Patients who were negative for anti-JC virus antibodies had an incidence of 0.09 cases or less per 1000 patients.  Among patients who test positive for anti-JC virus antibodies, the risk remained <1 per 1000 patients if no use of immunosuppressants and 2 per 1000 if prior use of immunosuppressants during the first two years of therapy.  The risks were five-fold higher after 2 years in both groups.

While the risks are becoming more clear, the benefits of natalizumab are fairly well-established for multiple sclerosis.  Natalizumab decreased the annualized rate of relapse among patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis by 68%.

Additional references:

  • -NEJM 2009; 361: 1067, 1075, 1081.  Asymptomatic detection of JC virus common in urine noted in patients Rx’d with natalizumab (19% baseline to 63% on Rx); actual leukoencephalopathy ~1/1000 patients.
  • -Gastroenterol 2007; 132: 1672.  ENCORE trial.
  • -JPGN 2007; 44: 185. n=31 children/adolescents.  55% response, 29% remission; dosed at 3mg/kg.
  • -IBD 2007; 13: 2.  n=79.  Trial of combination natalizumab & infliximab.
  • -NEJM 2006; 354: 899, 911, 924.  Natalizumab slows progression of MS.  Risk of PML due to JC virus 1:1000 in 18 months of Rx.
  • -NEJM 2005; 353: 1912/1965.  Natalizumab not significantly effective for Crohn’s in this study
  • -NEJM 2005; 353: 362, 369, 375, 414.  3 cases of PML associated with Natalizumab
  • -JPGN 2004; 39: S49 [abstract 0107].  Natalizumab in 38 adolescents was effective (Hyams et al).
  • -Gastroenterol 2004; 126: 1574-81. review.  Natalizumab benefitted subjects with elevated CRP. (dosing 300mg every 4 weeks.)
  • -NEJM 2003; 24-32 & 68.  Natalizumab improved response rates in pts c Crohn’s dz (similar to infliximab).  Drug blocks alpha4 integrins which are required for lymphocytes to enter the intestine.
  • -Gastroenterol 2001; 121: 268-74. Infusion of 3mg/kg decreases CDAI in Crohn’s dz.

Improve Care Now

Posted on by

Several years ago, “ImproveCareNow” Network was established with a goal of improving the quality of care children with inflammatory bowel disease. https://improvecarenow.org/ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beG2eMROWqg)

Documentation of some outcomes of this effort have now been published (Pediatrics 2012; 129: e1030-e1041).  In this study from six U.S. centers, data from 843 children with Crohn’s disease and Ulcerative Colitis were available.  Centers were eligible to participate if they did not have extensive quality improvement (QI) experience and if they were able to enroll >75% of their IBD patients.  During the course of the study (2007-2010), there were increases in the proportion of patients with measurement of thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) before initiation of thiopurines, increased percentage of individuals receiving an appropriate thiopurine dosage, and an increased percentage of patients with inactive disease.  In Crohn’s disease, the number with inactive disease changed from 55% to 68%; in ulcerative colitis, the number increased from 61% to 72%.  

This study shows significant progress in these patients and the potential benefit of a more-structured approach.  However, some of the improvements in these outcomes may not be to process improvements. 

Study limitations:

  • The study does not document the rate of inactive disease in non-participating centers; thus there is not an adequate control population.  Given more widespread use of biologic therapies, this may account for much of the improvement in outcomes.   In fact, the study does not describe the percentage of patients receiving thiopurines or biologic agents.
  • The use of the physician global assessment (PGA) as indicative of disease activity.  The authors acknowledge that “PGA ….is a relatively subjective measure.”  A more reliable measure of disease activity like a stool calprotectin, endoscopy, or imaging study improvement would have been helpful.  
  • Better documentation or better outcomes? It is not clear whether some of the improvement reflects better documentation or improved care delivery.

Despite the limitations of this study, it is a good starting point.  The goal of improving the care of patients is shared by almost all physicians.  One way to start making a difference is measuring specific outcomes and targeting specific goals/checklists. Going forward with QI there are many QI hurdles: 

  • Defining optimal care is nearly impossible, there are few trials comparing efficacy & difficult to judge risk/benefit ratio of many therapies.
  • Difficulty selecting appropriate outcome measures -indications for hospitalization and surgery are not clear-cut in many cases.  Surgery may be an appropriate treatment rather than a negative outcome. 
  • Risk adjustment is an imperfect science.

Goals with Quality Improvement:

  • Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles.
  • Learning from high-performing centers -benchmarking

Warranted vs unwarranted variations:
Unwarranted: selecting inadequate dosing of medications, failure to check for TB before remicade/biologics, failure to consider drug interactions, failure to discuss options with families
Warranted: variation due to differences in disease (eg budesonide for ileitis but not pancolitis), variation driven by patient preferences (eg. using NG instead of corticosteroids)

“When you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind” –Lord Kelvin 1883

“Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.” –Albert Einstein

Additional references on quality improvement:

  • Free Self Management Handbook endorsed by ImproveCareNow:

https://improvecarenow.org/patients/self-management-handbook

  • -JPGN 2009; 49: 272.  Review of quality measures/history.
  • -Kohn LT, et al. To Err is Human: Building Safer Health System.  Nat’l Academy Press; 2000
  • -Crossing the quality chasm.  Wash DC: Nat’l Academy Press; 2001.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2010; 8: 709.  Quality indicator sets in cirrhosis.
  • -J Pediatr 2005; 146: 744-50.  Bucuvalas JC et al.  Adjusting calcinerin inhibitor dosing
  • -IBD guidelines: www.cincinnatichildrens.org/svc/alpha/health-policy/ev-based/ibd.htm
  • -JPGN 2009; 49: 297.  Variation in care in pediatric Crohn disease. (Our center participated in this study)
  • -J Pediatr 2009; 154: 582.  Ventilator assoc pneumonia reduced w bundle of hand hygiene, elevated HOB, not changing ventilator circuits except when soiled & mouth care
  • -“The Learning Curve”(Atul Gawande) in The Best American Essays 2003 -some CF ctrs outperform, extending life expectancy ~14yrs.
  • -” A Surgeons Notes on Performance-Atul Gawande
    -NEJM 2007; 357: 2652.  Nice editorial.
  • www.icsi.org
  • www.qualityforum.org
  • www.ambulatoryqualityalliance.org
  • www.ncqa.org
  • www.cms.hhs.gov/hospitalqualityinit

Comments from lead author forwarded to blog:

Thanks for including our recent paper in your blog.  I agree with the study limitations as you mentioned, but wanted to put a couple of things in context.  We actually thought very hard about the issue of a control group, and specifically how to determine what the remission rate would be without the intervention.  We could not come up with a reasonable comparator (very few people/groups outside of ICN even know what the remission rate of their population is).  One very rough measure (which we did not feel was legitimate to include) is the rate of remission for new sites as they are joining the collaborative.  Established sites with complete participation have better outcomes than newer sites or sites that participate less fully, suggesting that at least a significant portion of the effect is due to the QI intervention rather than secular trend.  As far as the objective measures for outcomes, I know you realize that we are not able to mandate specific objective evaluations for a QI/observational research study, so we may never be able to use mucosal healing (for example) as our measure of remission.  However you probably noticed in the paper that we did demonstrate improvements in objective measures including sPCDAI, PUCAI and use of corticosteroids.  Certainly improvements in process measures may have been due in part to better documentation, but it is unlikely that objective outcome measures improved due to documentation. Thanks again for sharing our work with your audience.

Biomarkers identify patients who benefit and how

Posted on by

Fecal calprotectin and serum CRP levels are helping to identify which patients benefit most from biologic therapies, how frequently to dose individuals and how well inflammation correlates with changes in CDAI.  Several abstracts from ACG highlight these issues:

Abstract #1175: Fecal calprotectin concentration and clinical remission in patients with active Crohn’s disease treated with certolizumab pegol: results from PRECiSE 1 (Sandborn W et al).

Abstract #1164: Baseline C-reactive protein is associated with disease progression in  patients with Crohn’s disease (Colmbel J-F et al).

Abstract #1165: Association of baseline C-reactive protein with maintenance of remission in patients with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease treated with adalimumab (Sandborn W et al)

Abstract 1175 uses a post hoc analysis of patients with active Crohn’s disease (CD) who were treated with certolizumab or placebo for 26 weeks.  Baseline calprotectin concentrations were higher in patients who achieved remission.  Another interesting finding of this study was that placebo patients did not have improvement in calprotectin levels.  So, even though some patients  had improvement in CDAI scores, indicating subjective improvement, inflammatory activity did not decline.  This is another indicator of how flawed a CDAI is for indicating the effectiveness of an IBD therapy.

Abstract 1164 looked at 238 patients with moderate to severe CD who were randomized to placebo arm in the CHARM study.  These patients were given open-label adalimumab for induction (80 mg week 0, 40 mg week 2) followed by blinded weekly placebo treatment from weeks 4-56 with a switch to open-label adalimumab after week 12 for a disease flare.  Higher baseline CRP levels in patients with moderate or severe CD were associated with higher disease scores after four weeks and after one year.  This suggests that a patient with higher CRP is more likely to have disease progression without adequate treatment.

Abstract 1165 examined the relationship between CRP and remission in CHARM patients. In the high baseline CRP group, 39 patients received adalimumab every other week, 28 weekly, and 34 received placebo.  In the low baseline CRP group, there were 42 every other week patients, 33 weekly, and 39 placebo patients.  In the high baseline CRP group, remission rates were 50% higher in the weekly treatment group compared to the every other week group.  Patients with low baseline CRP had similar results when treated weekly versus every other week.  Thus, patients with high baseline CRP are more likely to benefit from dose escalation and low CRP patients are more likely to have coexistent issues contributing to their symptoms (eg. IBS).

One other caveat: CRP production is geneticallly-determined and some patients do not make CRP in spite of active inflammation.

Related blog entries:

Food as medicine

Speed matters

Additional calprotectin references:

  • -IBD 2010; 16: 482. Calprotectin correlated with inflammation of ileum after pouch creation in children.
  • -IBD 2009; 12: 1851. Calprotectin was the only marker to correlate with endoscopic activity; n=134.
  • -JPGN 2009; 48: 48. Good sensitivity/specificity of calprotectin & lactoferrin. Up to 96% sensitivity & specificity.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2008; 6: 1218. Lack of correlation between clinical symptoms and fecal biomarkers. However, biomarkers do correlate with mucosal/endoscopic disease. n=164.
  • -IBD 2008; 14: 1392. Monitoring IBD activity level c calprotectin & lactoferrin; n=15.
  • -IBD 2008; 14: 1229. Clinical utility in assessing histological relapse in kids. n=73 over 8yrs…may allow avoidance of invasive tests; cut off of 275mcg/gm had 97% sensitivity/neg pred value 85% pos pred value/specificity at predicting relapse.
  • -IBD 2008; 14: 669. Fecal calprotectin good at predicting relapse in pediatric IBD w cutoff of 400.

C-reactive protein references:

  • -J Pediatr 2011; 159: 340. CRP helps identify IBD.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hepatology 2011; 9: 421. CRP predicts response to IFX. n=718. those with high CRP had 91% response vs 83% in pts with NL CRP.
  • -Gastro 2004; 126: 1574-81. Crohn’s review. High CRP suggests likely response to anti-TNFα treatment.
  • -JPGN 2004; 38: 509-12. CRP more reliable than ESR for IBD.
  • -NEJM 1999; 340: 448. Review on acute phase reactants. CRP better than ESR as ESR is an indirect measure (resistance of plasma, due to fibrinogen, to the falling of RBCs) & broader range for CRP.

Magnetic resonance enterography for Crohn’s disease

Posted on by

Magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) has increasingly been recognized as an effective way to characterize small bowel disease in Crohn’s disease (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18: 520-28).

In this retrospective pediatric study, 95 patients with Crohn’s disease underwent MRE from 2006-2009.  As expected, terminal ileal disease was the most common site of involvement with 54%; this was followed by ileum with 19%, and jejunum with 17%.  Other findings included solitary jejunal inflammation (3.7%), small bowel stenosis (1.9%) fistula (1%), and abscess (1%).  Specific evidence of inflammation included contrast enhancement, bowel wall thickening or derangement of bowel wall shape.  The images in the article are excellent.

The main advantage of MRE over CT enterography (CTE) is the lack of ionizing radiation.  In addition, MRE can better detect soft tissue contrast suggestive of bowel wall edema.  This helps distinguish acute from chronic inflammation.  Obtaining an MRE is technically more challenging and more costly.  The youngest patient in the study was seven; though the authors note that the youngest patient they have performed MRE was six.

Additional references:

  • More imaging needed?
  • -JPGN 2010; 51: 603.  MRE for suspected IBD.  Useful in pediatric Crohn’s disease.
  • -IBD 2009; 15: 1635. U/S compared favorably with endoscopy in correlating postoperative recurrence with Crohn’s.
  • -Clin Gastro Hepatol 2006; 3: 1221. MRI as accurate in evaluating ileocolonic disease with flareups as endoscopy.
  • -IBD 2004; 10: 452-61. U/S was very helpful in identifying disease and complications.