A Systematic Review of Monogenic Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background & AimsAdvances in genomic technologies have led to increasing reports of monogenic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Here, we systematically review the literature to determine the clinical features, genetic profile, and previously used treatment strategies in monogenic IBD.MethodsA systematic review of MEDLINE articles published between January 2000 and December 2020 was conducted. A total of 750 individual monogenic IBD cases were identified from 303 eligible articles.ResultsThe most frequently reported monogenic IBD genes were IL10RA/B, XIAP, CYBB, LRBA, and TTC7A. In total, 63.4% of patients developed IBD before 6 years of age, 17.4% developed IBD between ages 10 and 17.9 years, and 10.9% developed IBD after age 18. There was a substantial difference between these age groups and the underlying monogenic disorders. Only 31.7% had any history of extraintestinal comorbidity (EIC) before IBD onset, but 76.0% developed at least 1 EIC during their clinical course. The most common EICs were atypical infection (44.7%), dermatologic abnormality (38.4%), and autoimmunity (21.9%). Bowel surgery, biologic therapy, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation were performed in 27.1%, 32.9%, and 23.1% of patients, respectively.ConclusionsMonogenic IBD cases, although rare, have varied extraintestinal comorbidities and limited treatment options including surgery and transplant. Early identification and improved understanding of the characteristics of the genes and underlying disease processes in monogenic IBD is important for effective management. Advances in genomic technologies have led to increasing reports of monogenic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Here, we systematically review the literature to determine the clinical features, genetic profile, and previously used treatment strategies in monogenic IBD. A systematic review of MEDLINE articles published between January 2000 and December 2020 was conducted. A total of 750 individual monogenic IBD cases were identified from 303 eligible articles. The most frequently reported monogenic IBD genes were IL10RA/B, XIAP, CYBB, LRBA, and TTC7A. In total, 63.4% of patients developed IBD before 6 years of age, 17.4% developed IBD between ages 10 and 17.9 years, and 10.9% developed IBD after age 18. There was a substantial difference between these age groups and the underlying monogenic disorders. Only 31.7% had any history of extraintestinal comorbidity (EIC) before IBD onset, but 76.0% developed at least 1 EIC during their clinical course. The most common EICs were atypical infection (44.7%), dermatologic abnormality (38.4%), and autoimmunity (21.9%). Bowel surgery, biologic therapy, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation were performed in 27.1%, 32.9%, and 23.1% of patients, respectively. Monogenic IBD cases, although rare, have varied extraintestinal comorbidities and limited treatment options including surgery and transplant. Early identification and improved understanding of the characteristics of the genes and underlying disease processes in monogenic IBD is important for effective management.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».