Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26264216›Full record

ReviewAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2015

Review article: biomarkers and personalised therapy in functional lower gastrointestinal disorders.

M Camilleri

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Potential Value of Biomarker-Based Approaches for Evaluation and Management of Costly Functional Gastrointestinal Diseases.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Cost Effectiveness of Biomarker Tests for Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Diarrhea: A Framework for Payers.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2018
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Pharmacotherapy for Irritable Bowel Syndrome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2017
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Measurement of Gastrointestinal and Colonic Motor Functions in Humans and Animals.Cellular and molecular gastroenterology and hepatology · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

M CamilleriClinical Enteric Neuroscience Translational and Epidemiological Research (C.E.N.T.E.R.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Mayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

Bile Acids, Genetic Control and Colonic Function in Irritable Bowel SyndromeR01DK092179 · NIDDK · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI CAMILLERI, MICHAEL L. · 2011 to 2015
$1.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK092179
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatment of IBS and functional lower gastrointestinal disorders is still based predominantly on symptoms; biomarkers that reflect the mechanism or pathophysiology have been identified. Given the diverse mechanisms that result in the same clinical phenotype of IBS, it is hypothesised that identification of biomarkers may lead to individualisation of medical therapy.

aimTo review the biomarkers that have been appraised in IBS.

methodsA single author reviewed the published literature on biomarkers appraised in IBS.

resultsThe current literature suggests that these biomarkers are insufficiently sensitive or specific to differentiate IBS from health or from other diseases causing similar symptoms, such as coeliac disease or inflammatory bowel disease. Most of the proposed biomarkers are not actionable, that is, they do not lead to an efficacious therapy based on the biological inference of the biomarker itself. However, among proposed biomarkers in IBS, some are actionable, as they specifically reflect a quantitative difference in a mediator of dysfunction or result in a quantifiable disturbance of function that can be specifically treated. Such biomarkers may potentially identify relevant subgroups that respond to specific therapy. The most promising actionable biomarkers are measurement of colonic transit (leading to treatments that reverse the abnormal transit) and measurements of bile acid diarrhoea to identify responders to bile acid sequestrants.

conclusionsTherefore, although biomarkers are not ready for prime time as diagnostic tests in IBS, some biomarkers could identify subgroups of patients with IBS for inclusion in clinical trials that target specific dysfunctions. Such an approach may enhance treatment efficacy, and may ultimately help reduce costs in drug development and in the management of patients in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Bile Acids and SaltsBiomarkersDiarrheaFemaleGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansIrritable Bowel SyndromeLower Gastrointestinal TractMiddle AgedPrecision MedicineBile Acids and SaltsBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID26264216
PMCPMC4558225
OpenAlexW1863614949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.