Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 28, 2021; 27(16): 1828-1840
Published online Apr 28, 2021. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i16.1828
Table 2 Synthetic presentation of data on serum marker performance in detecting mucosal healing
Ref.
Study type
Investigated marker
MH definition
CU/CD
Number of patients
AUC
95%CI
Sn (%)
Sp (%)
Cutoff level
Shinzaki et al[40]Prospective cohortLRGMatts = 1-2 (MH); Matts = 1/MES = 0 (complete MH)CU1290.849; 0.759NANANANA
Dierckx et al[39]Case control pilot studyGlycAMES = 0-1; SES-CD ≤ 2CU + CD58 + 10 healthy controlsNANANANANA
Neubauer et al[36]Prospective cohortS-NamptMES = 0-1; NA for CDCU + CD240 + 40 non-IBD controls0.7680.67-0.857675≤ 1.54 ng/mL
Planell et al[35]Cross-sectional cohort + case controlHPMES = 0UC126 + 20 healthy controls + 160.750.64-0.8563.580-2.9 DCt
Nakov et al[32]Prospective cohortTTF3MES = 0; UCEIS = 0UC0.9270.877-0.97687.986.96.74
Budzynska et al[34]Prospective cohortNGALMES = 0-1; SES-CD = 3-7UC + CD1200.79;0.6080.65-0.93; NA96; 4850; 8343.6 ng/mL; 72.5 ng/mL
Wakai et al[38]Retrospective cohortSerum amyloid AMES = 0-1UC1080.8070.748-0.86772.285< 5.8