Prospective comparison of diagnostic tests for bile acid diarrhoea

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Dokumenter

  • Fulltext

    Forlagets udgivne version, 605 KB, PDF-dokument

  • Christian Borup
  • Lars Vinter-Jensen
  • Søren Peter German Jørgensen
  • Signe Wildt
  • Jesper Graff
  • Tine Gregersen
  • Anna Zaremba
  • Trine Borup Andersen
  • Camilla Nøjgaard
  • Hans Bording Timm
  • Antonin Lamazière
  • Dominique Rainteau
  • Svend Høime Hansen
  • Jüri Johannes Rumessen
  • Munck, Lars Kristian
Background
Bile acid diarrhoea is often missed because gold standard nuclear medicine tauroselcholic [75-Se] acid (SeHCAT) testing has limited availability. Empirical treatment effect has unknown diagnostic performance, whereas plasma 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (C4) is inexpensive but lacks sensitivity.

Aims
To determine diagnostic characteristics of empirical treatment and explore improvements in diagnostics with potential better availability than SeHCAT.

Methods
This diagnostic accuracy study was part of a randomised, placebo-controlled trial of colesevelam. Consecutive patients with chronic diarrhoea attending SeHCAT had blood and stool sampled. Key thresholds were C4 > 46 ng/mL and SeHCAT retention ≤10%. A questionnaire recorded patient-reported empirical treatment effect. We analysed receiver operating characteristics and explored machine learning applied logistic regression and decision tree modelling with internal validation.

Results
Ninety-six (38%) of 251 patients had SeHCAT retention ≤10%. The effect of empirical treatment assessed with test results for bile acid studies blinded had 63% (95% confidence interval 44%–79%) sensitivity and 65% (47%–80%) specificity; C4 > 46 ng/mL had 47% (37%–57%) and 92% (87%–96%), respectively. A decision tree combining C4 ≥ 31 ng/mL with ≥1.1 daily watery stools (Bristol type 6 and 7) had 70% (51%–85%) sensitivity and 95% (83%–99%) specificity. The logistic regression model, including C4, the sum of measured stool bile acids and daily watery stools, had 77% (58%–90%) sensitivity and 93% (80%–98%) specificity.

Conclusions
Diagnosis of bile acid diarrhoea using empirical treatment was inadequate. Exploration suggested considerable improvements in the sensitivity of C4-based testing, offering potential widely available diagnostics. Further validation is warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03876717.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftAlimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Vol/bind59
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)39-50
Antal sider12
ISSN0269-2813
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2024

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
This study was funded entirely by independent research grants, predominantly by a donation from the Fabrikant Vilhelm Pedersen og hustrus mindelegat by recommendation from the Novo Nordisk Foundation (NNF19OC0055844). Smaller donations were granted by the Region Zealand Health‐Scientific Fund (R17A48B39, RSSF2017000645), the Axel Muusfeldts Fond (2017‐771), Overlæge Johan Boserup og Lise Boserups Legat (20795‐24), Aase og Ejnar Danielsens Fond (10‐002035), Civilingeniør H.C. Bechgaard og hustru Ella Mary Bechgaards Fond (2017‐1064/93), Prosektor Axel Emil Søeborg Ohlsen og ægtefælles Mindelegat (6386 MT/IV), the Foundation for Advancement of Medical Science under the A.P. Møller, and Chastine Mc‐Kinney Møller Foundation (18‐L‐0394).

Funding Information:
We are grateful to the patients for participation and to our funders and collaborators making this work possible. We thank research Majbritt Frost Nilsson (M.H.S.) for her crucial role in the project management of the Aalborg study site.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

ID: 382439004