4.3 Review

Molecular Analysis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Clinically Useful Tools for Diagnosis, Response Prediction, and Monitoring of Targeted Therapy

期刊

MOLECULAR DIAGNOSIS & THERAPY
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 141-158

出版社

ADIS INT LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s40291-015-0142-7

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH/NIDDK [R21 DK077064, P30DK089502]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biomarkers of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are non-invasive or minimally invasive tests for IBD diagnosis and/or prognosis as well as assessment of disease activity and response to therapy. Here, we update the current status of IBD biomarkers, including serological, fecal, and genetic (DNA and microRNA [miRNA]) biomarkers. As an update, the classical serological biomarkers, including ASCA, pANCA, anti-OmpC, anti-Cbir, anti-I2, and other anti-glycan antibodies, are discussed only briefly. Emphasis in this article is given to those that have been recently identified or extensively characterized, as well as to the clinical utilities of biomarkers, with special attention to prediction of disease complication and activity assessment, mucosal healing, and response to therapies. In particular, we discuss the utilities of blood-based biomarkers predicting therapeutic response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, such as anti-anti-TNF alpha antibodies or anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and trough level of anti-TNF alpha. Fecal biomarkers, which have recently attracted substantial attention, are also discussed extensively, including the well-characterized calprotectin and lactoferrin, as well as the recently characterized M2-PK, CHI3L1, neopterin, MMP-9, and HMGB1. Genome and exome sequencing enables the discovery of a number of rare yet disease-defining IBD-susceptible genes, particularly those involved in very early onset IBD, providing rare yet extremely useful biomarkers at genetic levels for IBD diagnosis/prognosis. Finally, we briefly summarize the discovery, characterization, and potential implications of miRNA as potential IBD biomarkers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据