Prospective, study comparing the accuracy of two different stool antigen tests (Premier Platinum HpSA and novel ImmunoCard STAT! rapid test) for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.

BACKGROUND: At present only monoclonal EIA (enzyme-immunoassay) stool antigen-tests have obtained optimal accuracy in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of two stool antigen-tests, the validated Premier Platinum HpSA PLUS (EIA test) and the newly available ImmunoCard STAT! HpSA HD (rapid test) for the initial diagnosis and the confirmation of eradication of H. pylori infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with indication of H. pylori diagnosis, or confirmation after treatment were included. Data were coded to protect personal data and ensure blindness between tests. Accuracy was considered as coincident diagnosis with the gold standard (13C-urea breath test, UBT). The EIA was used as a bench standard. All stool tests were performed in duplicate. RESULTS: 264 patients completed the protocol (100 naïve, 164 post-eradication). Average age was 52 years, 61% women, 11% ulcer. Positive diagnoses by UBT were 41% for naïve and 17% for post-eradication. Overall ImmunoCard and EIA accuracies were respectively 91% (95%C.I.=88-94%) and 89% (86-93%), sensitivities 72% (67-78%) and 72% (67-78%), and specificities 98% (96-100%), and 95% (92-97%). Concordance between ImmunoCard and EIA was 95% (93-98%). DISCUSSION: Our results indicate that the newly available ImmunoCard rapid stool antigen-test achieves 90% accuracy, with high specificity but suboptimal sensitivity. The ImmunoCard attained equivalent accuracies as the EIA bench standard, with 95% concordance.

Effectiveness of adalimumab for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in clinical practice: comparison between anti-tumour necrosis factor-naïve and non-naïve patients.

BACKGROUND: Ulcerative colitis (UC) treatment is focused to achieve mucosal healing, avoiding disease progression. The study aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of adalimumab (ADA) in UC and to identify predictors of remission to ADA. METHODS: This cohort study used data from the ENEIDA registry. Clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic remission, adverse events (AE), colectomy, and hospitalisations were evaluated; baseline characteristics and biological parameters were compared to determine predictors of response. RESULTS: We included 263 patients (87 naïve and 176 previously exposed to anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha, TNF). After 12 weeks, clinical response, clinical remission, and endoscopic remission rates were 51, 26, and 14 %, respectively. The naïve group demonstrated better response to treatment than the anti-TNF-exposed group at short-term. Clinical and endoscopic remission within 1 year of treatment was better in the naïve group (65 vs. 49 and 50 vs. 35 %, respectively). The rates of AE, dose-escalation, hospitalisations, and colectomy during the first year were higher in anti-TNF-exposed patients (40, 43, and 27 % vs. 26, 21, and 11 %, respectively). Patients with primary failure and intolerance to the first anti-TNF and severe disease were associated with worse clinical response. Primary non-response to prior anti-TNF treatment and severe disease were predictive of poorer clinical remission. Low levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and faecal calprotectin (FC) at baseline were predictors of clinical remission. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, ADA was effective in UC, especially in anti-TNF naïve patients. FC and CRP could be predictors of treatment effectiveness.