Fecal Calprotectin in Pregnancy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
To the Editor: Active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, necessitating close monitoring of these higher risk pregnancies. However, there have been limitations in the available evidence to support the use of traditional noninvasive methods of monitoring activity beyond symptoms in pregnancy.1 Although fecal calprotectin does not seem to change from the physiological changes of pregnancy2 and in a small study of 17 patients correlated with symptom based disease activity,3 two larger studies of 33 and 75 patients respectively found that fecal calprotectin during pregnancy correlated poorly with disease activity.4,5 We thank Julsgaard et al for their addition to the small number of studies to date considering objective disease monitoring in pregnant women with IBD. Their publication, titled “Fecal Calprotectin Is Not Affected by Pregnancy: Clinical Implications for the Management of Pregnant Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease”3 provides evidence that pregnancy alone does not affect fecal calprotectin (FC), contrasting the potential variations due to the physiological change in pregnancy seen with the use of other biomarkers, such as C-reactive protein and albumin.4 It is essential that disease monitoring continues to occur in pregnancy, particularly given the potential detrimental impact of disease activity on maternal and fetal outcomes.5 Furthermore, as it is not appropriate to perform repeated endoscopic assessment during pregnancy, FC may be even more important than in the nonpregnant patient, whereas it also enables ongoing management with a treat-to-target strategy. Accordingly, at the Vancouver IBD and pregnancy clinic, all patients are monitored during their pregnancy with routine FC with an additional calprotectin performed at the time of an increase in symptoms or de-escalation of medical therapy. For example, during her second trimester, a patient developed nonspecific abdominal pain on the background of ceasing her adalimumab in the first trimester. As we had a normal FC in early pregnancy, when her repeat FC was reported at >1000 μg/g we were able to better inform her on reinitiating her biologics during pregnancy. Further support for our proactive strategy of noninvasive disease activity monitoring during pregnancy has been provided by the findings of Julsgaard et al in their multicenter, international prospective observational study which assessed FC in women during pregnancy with or without IBD. FC concentrations were correlated with CRP, clinical activity indices and physician global assessment. A statistically significant difference was found between the median FC in the control and IBD groups, whereas unlike for CRP, a correlation was also shown in women with active disease compared to those in sustained remission. Although there remains a need for further confirmatory studies, such results have provided more evidence for the use of FC during pregnancy, which we believe to be an integral component in the management of IBD in pregnancy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,032 | 0,023 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».