Symptomatic gallstone disease: Recurrence patterns and risk factors for relapse after first admission, the RELAPSTONE study.

BACKGROUND: Delayed cholecystectomy in patients with symptomatic gallstone disease is associated with recurrence. Limited data on the recurrence patterns and the factors that determine them are available. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the pattern of relapse in each symptomatic gallstone disease (acute pancreatitis, cholecystitis, cholangitis, symptomatic choledocholithiasis, and biliary colic) and determine the associated factors. METHODS: RELAPSTONE was an international multicenter retrospective cohort study. Patients (n = 3016) from 18 tertiary centers who suffered a first episode of symptomatic gallstone disease from 2018 to 2020 and had not undergone cholecystectomy during admission were included. The main outcome was relapse-free survival. Kaplan-Meier curves were used in the bivariate analysis. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to identify prognostic factors associated with relapses. RESULTS: Mean age was 76.6 [IQR: 59.7-84.1], and 51% were male. The median follow-up was 5.3 months [IQR 2.1-12.4]. Relapse-free survival was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.77-0.80) at 3 months, 0.71 (95% CI: 0.69-0.73) at 6 months, and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.61-0.65) at 12 months. In multivariable analysis, older age (HR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.49-0.66), sphincterotomy (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.49-0.68) and higher leukocyte count (HR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.70-0.90) were independently associated with lower risk of relapse, whereas higher levels of alanine aminotransferase (HR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.02-1.46) and multiple cholelithiasis (HR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.05-1.34) were associated with higher relapse rates. CONCLUSION: The relapse rate is high and different in each symptomatic gallstone disease. Our independent predictors could be useful for prioritizing patients on the waiting list for cholecystectomies.

A Point-of-Care Faecal Test Combining Four Biomarkers Allows Avoidance of Normal Colonoscopies and Prioritizes Symptomatic Patients with a High Risk of Colorectal Cancer.

Most colonoscopies performed to evaluate gastrointestinal symptoms detect only non-relevant pathologies. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a qualitative point-of-care (POC) test combining four biomarkers (haemoglobin, transferrin, calprotectin, and lactoferrin), a quantitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for haemoglobin, and a quantitative faecal calprotectin (FC) test in symptomatic patients prospectively recruited. Colorectal cancer (CRC), adenoma requiring surveillance, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), microscopic colitis, and angiodysplasia were considered significant pathologies. A total of 571 patients were included. Significant pathology was diagnosed in 118 (20.7%), including 30 CRC cases (5.3%). The POC test yielded the highest negative predictive values: 94.8% for a significant pathology and 100% for CRC or IBD if the four markers turned negative (36.8% of the patients). Negative predictive values of FIT, FC, and its combination for diagnosis of a significant pathology were 88.4%, 87.6%, and 90.8%, respectively. Moreover, the positive predictive value using the POC test was 82.3% for significant pathology when all biomarkers tested positive (6% of the patients), with 70.6% of these patients diagnosed with CRC or IBD. The AUC of the POC test was 0.801 (95%CI 0.754-0.848) for the diagnosis of a significant pathology. Therefore, this POC faecal test allows the avoidance of unnecessary colonoscopies and prioritizes high risk symptomatic patients.

Blood-Cell-Based Inflammatory Markers as a Useful Tool for Early Diagnosis in Colorectal Cancer.

Background: Systemic inflammation seems to be involved in the pathogenetic pathways of colorectal cancer (CRC). Analytical markers that reflect the inflammatory status, such as neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) or systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), have been proposed as tools for the prognosis of CRC. Nevertheless, their use for diagnosis has been scarcely investigated. Aims: To analyze the ability of these markers and of a new marker combining SII and hemoglobin concentration, named NP/LHb = [neutrophils x platelets]/[lymphocytes x hemoglobin], as tools for CRC diagnosis. Furthermore, we studied their association with CRC-related variables. Methods: Case-control study including 214 CRC patients and 214 controls without CRC, matched by age (±5 years) and sex. We collected demographic, CRC-related and laboratory variables to calculate NLR, PLR, SII, and NP/LHb. In the case group, the laboratory variables were collected at two different period times, 6 months (IQR 4-8) before the CRC diagnosis and at the time of the diagnosis. ROC analysis was performed to evaluate the discriminatory accuracy of each index and we calculated Se, Sp, PPV, NPV, and OR to identify the diagnostic performance of each positive marker. Results: NP/LHb showed high Sp (92.06%) and PPV (87.50%) to diagnose patients with CRC. This index exhibited an OR of 14.52 (8.26-25.52) and the best area under the curve (AUC: 0.78) for a positive CRC diagnosis. We found significant differences in all indices according to the presence of CRC, observing the highest values in CRC patients at time of diagnosis, in comparison with the analysis performed in the previous months to diagnosis or with control patients. There were significant differences in all ratios according to TNM stages (p < 0.05). PLR, SII and NP/LHb (but not NLR) showed significant differences according to tumor location (p < 0.05). Right-sided colon cancers presented the highest values, in comparison with left-sided and rectal cancers. Conclusions: Systemic inflammatory cell ratios (especially NP/LHb) change over time with the development of CRC, so they could be useful in its early diagnosis. We suggest that they could be routinely measured in patients with suspicion of CRC, to identify those ones with a higher risk of cancer, considering the high positive predictive value they have shown in our study.

A Patient Self-Made Point-of-Care Fecal Test Improves Diagnostic Accuracy Compared with Fecal Calprotectin Alone in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring inflammatory bowel disease patients may be challenging. Fecal calprotectin is one of the most performed tests. Other fecal biomarkers are less used in clinical practice. Rapid fecal tests that could be performed by patients may be a useful strategy to closely monitor disease activity. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study including consecutive inflammatory bowel disease patients referred for colonoscopy in a single center. Certest FOB + Transferrin + Calprotectin + Lactoferrin® (Certest Biotec S.L, Zaragoza, Spain), a one-step point-of-care test which simultaneously detects these four biomarkers was performed. Endoscopic inflammatory activity was defined using the Mayo score (≥1) in ulcerative colitis, SES-CD (>3) and Rutgeerts scores (≥1) for Crohn's disease. RESULTS: Out of a total of 106 patients (56.5% female, mean age 51 years), 54 (50.9%) were diagnosed with ulcerative colitis and 52 (49.1%) with Crohn's disease. Endoscopic activity was detected in 42 patients (39.0%). Fecal calprotectin provided the best sensitivity (97.6%), with limited specificity (34.4%). Compared to calprotectin, the other 3 fecal biomarkers showed better specificity (87.5-92.1%) and lower sensitivity (45.2-59.5%). Patients with a negative result in all biomarkers (19/106-17.9%) had 100% (CI 95% 97.4-100) negative predictive value, while patients with the 4 biomarkers positive (13/106-12.3%) had 100% (CI 95% 96.1-100) positive predictive value of endoscopic inflammatory activity. AUROC of this 4 biomarker point-of-care test was 0.845 (95% CI 0.771-0.920), significantly higher than the AUROCs of any of the 4 biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: This test may be a useful strategy to monitor inflammatory activity in clinical practice by excluding or prioritizing patients in need of a colonoscopy.

The Addition of Other Fecal Biomarkers Does Not Improve the Diagnostic Accuracy of Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Test Alone in a Colorrectal Cancer Screening Cohort.

Background: Screening with fecal occult blood test reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, and is currently implemented in most countries. However, around 40% of screening colonoscopies are normal. Thus, strategies to avoid these colonoscopies are highly necessary. Adding other fecal biomarkers, such as fecal calprotectin (FC), lactoferrin, and transferrin may be useful, but evidence is scarce. Aims: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of fecal occult blood immunochemical test (FIT), FC, and a one-step combo card test for the simultaneous semi-qualitative detection of human hemoglobin (hHb), transferrin (hTf), calprotectin (hCp) and lactoferrin (hLf) in a CRC screening program population. Methods: Single-center, prospective observational study, enrolling patients included in a CRC screening program, referred for a colonoscopy due to a positive FIT test. Participants collected a stool sample prior to bowel preparation, and FIT, FC and the combo semi-qualitative tests were performed on the sample. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and area under receiver operator curve (AUC) for diagnosis of advanced neoplasia, advanced adenoma and CRC were estimated for each biomarker and their combinations. The primary endpoint of the study was to assess whether these biomarkers could improve the diagnostic accuracy of FIT alone. Results: 336 consecutive patients (64% males) were recruited. Advanced neoplasia was found in 129/336 (38.4%) patients, and of these, 22/336 (6.5%) were diagnosed of CRC. 153/336 (45.5%) colonoscopies were completely normal. The AUC for the diagnosis of advanced neoplasia were 0.725 (95%CI 0.665-0.784) for FIT, 0.477 (95%CI 0.413-0.541) for FC and 0.732 (95%CI 0.674-0.791) for the combination of both (FIT + FC) quantitative tests. The AUCs for the combo test were 0.70 (95%CI 0.641-0.760) for hHb, 0.625 (95%CI 0.562-0.698) for hTf, 0.532 (95%CI 0.469-0.595) for hCp, 0.531 (95%CI 0.466-0.595 ) for hLf and 0.681 (95%CI 0.620-0.741) for the combination of the four biomarkers. Conclusion: In average-risk population, FIT appears to be the best fecal marker for the diagnosis of CRC and advanced adenoma. None of the other biomarkers explored or their combinations provided a better diagnostic accuracy. Only hTF showed an acceptable diagnostic accuracy. FC and hLF were not useful in this setting.