P1211 A faecal microbial signature, in combination with faecal calprotectin, to optimise endoscopic activity monitoring in Crohn’s Disease
S Taboada-López,M Malagón,J Amoedo,S Ramió-Pujol,D Busquets,A Bahi,P Gilabert,L Rodríguez-Alonso,M Mañosa,F Cañete,P F Torres,V J Morales,P G Delgado-Guillena,E Domenech,J Guardiola,M Serra-Pagès,L J Garcia-Gil,X Aldeguer
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.1341
2024-01-01
Journal of Crohn's and Colitis
Abstract:Abstract Background Monitoring Crohn's Disease (CD) endoscopic activity (EA) is crucial to identify disease progression and tailor treatment. Faecal calprotectin (FC) provides a non-invasive and cost-effective alternative to colonoscopy; however, it exhibits only a moderate correlation with EA in CD, highlighting the need for a non-invasive approach that either replaces or complements FC. This study aimed to identify a faecal microbial signature that could offer more precise monitoring of EA in CD. Methods A cohort of 55 CD patients was recruited from four Spanish hospitals. All participants provided a faecal sample before undergoing colonoscopy for the analysis of FC levels and microbial markers abundances, including Eubacteria (EUB), Escherichia coli (ECO), Faecalibacterium prausnitzii (FPRA) and its phylogroups I and II (PHG-I, and PHG-II), Ruminococcus spp. (RUM), Akkermansia muciniphila (AKK), Methanobrevibacter smithii (MSM), Clostridium clusters I and XIV (CLO, and XIV), Enterococcus sp. (ENT), Roseburia sp. (ROS), and Gammaproteobacteria (GAM). The Simplified Endoscopic Score for Crohn’s Disease (SES-CD) was employed to assess EA, being remission and activity defined as SES-CD≤2 and SES-CD>2, respectively. Results FC levels showed a significant correlation with SES-CD (rs=0.778, p<0.001) and a cut-off of 250 μg/g discerned EA with 86.49% sensitivity (SS), 75.65% specificity (SP), 77.06% positive predictive value (PPV) and 84.53% negative predictive value (NPV). Significant differences were identified when comparing the relative abundances of ECO (p<0.005), GAM (p<0.005), and RUM (p=0.026) between activity and remission. The relative abundance of ECO (rs=-0.495, p<0.001), GAM (rs=-0.492, p<0.001), and RUM (rs=0.274, p=0.042) also showed a significant correlation with SES-CD. None of the microbial markers alone exceeded FC performance. The combination of FC levels with the abundances of the microbial markers ECO, RUM, GAM, PHG-II, and XIV in a unique signature outperformed FC alone in discerning EA, with 97.57% SS, 93.59% SP, 91.65% PPV, and 97.57% NPV. The false positive (FP) and negative (FN) rates were reduced by 60.00% and 75.00%, respectively, compared to FC alone. Notably, all the FN presented mild endoscopic activity, indicating accurate monitoring of patients with moderate or severe EA. Conclusion A new faecal microbial signature combined with FC has been defined to monitor EA in CD with higher performance than FC alone. This tool may improve clinical decision support systems in CD management, refining endoscopic allocation, and providing a more patient-friendly and cost-effective approach. Further studies are needed to validate these results.
gastroenterology & hepatology