Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35194978›Full record

ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2022

PICaSSO virtual electronic chromendoscopy accurately reflects combined endoscopic and histological assessment for prediction of clinical outcomes in ulcerative colitis.

Olga Maria Nardone, Alina Bazarova, Pradeep Bhandari, Rosanna Cannatelli, Marco Daperno, Jose Ferraz, Martin Goetz, Xianyong Gui, Bu Hayee, Gert De Hertogh and 17 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Disease Clearance in Ulcerative Colitis: A Narrative Review.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025
    Review
  7. Present and future of endoscopy precision for inflammatory bowel disease.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. AI and endoscopy/histology in UC: the rise of machine.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. New endoscopic tools in inflammatory bowel disease.United European gastroenterology journal · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

27 authors at 20 institutions in 8 countries.

Olga Maria NardoneInstitute of Immunology & Immunotherapy, NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facilities, University of Birmingham, UK and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9554-4785
Alina BazarovaInstitute of Immunology & Immunotherapy, NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facilities, University of Birmingham, UK and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Pradeep BhandariDepartment of Gastroenterology, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK.
Rosanna CannatelliInstitute of Immunology & Immunotherapy, NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facilities, University of Birmingham, UK and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Marco DapernoDepartment of Gastroenterology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.
Jose FerrazDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Martin GoetzDepartment of Gastroenterology, Klinikum Böblingen, Sindelfingen, Germany.
Xianyong GuiDepartment of Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Bu HayeeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kings College London, London, UK.
Gert De HertoghDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Mark LazarevDepartment of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Ji LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Dongcheng-qu, China.
Adolfo Parra-BlancoDepartment of Gastroenterology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Luca PastorelliDepartment of Gastroenterology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
Remo PanaccioneDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Vincenzo OcchipintiDepartment of Gastroenterology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
Timo RathLudig Demling Endoscopy Center, University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
Samuel C L SmithInstitute of Immunology & Immunotherapy, NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facilities, University of Birmingham, UK and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Uday N ShivajiInstitute of Immunology & Immunotherapy, NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facilities, University of Birmingham, UK and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Gian Eugenio TontiniDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, University of Milan, Milano, Italy.
Michael ViethInstitute for Pathology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.
Vincenzo VillanacciInstitute of Pathology Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.
Davide ZardoUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Raf BisschopsDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-9994-8226
Ralf KiesslichDepartment of Gastroenterology, Helios HSK Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Subrata GhoshInstitute of Immunology & Immunotherapy, NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facilities, University of Birmingham, UK and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1713-7797
Marietta IacucciInstitute of Immunology & Immunotherapy, NIHR Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facilities, University of Birmingham, UK and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3142-9550
NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre · GBUniversity of Calgary · CAIRCCS Policlinico San Donato · ITKU Leuven · BE5T Torino (Italy) · ITAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · ITBayreuth Medical Center · DEFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEHelios Dr. Horst Schmidt Kliniken Wiesbaden · DEJohns Hopkins Hospital · USKing's College - North Carolina · USKlinikum Sindelfingen-Böblingen · DEPeking Union Medical College Hospital · CNQueen Alexandra Hospital · GBUniversity College Cork · IEUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cologne · DEUniversity of Milan · ITUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsA composite endoscopic-histologic remission is increasingly explored as an important endpoint in ulcerative colitis (UC). We investigated combined endoscopic-histologic remission for predicting clinical outcomes at 12 months compared with endoscopic remission alone using the high definition virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) Paddington International virtual ChromoendoScopy ScOre (PICaSSO) and histology scores.

methodsUlcerative colitis patients, prospectively enrolled from 11 international centres, underwent VCE with targeted biopsies and followed up for 12 months. Endoscopic activity was assessed by Mayo Endoscopic Score (MES), Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index Severity (UCEIS) followed by VCE-PICaSSO. Robarts Histopathological Index|Robarts Histological index≤3 without neutrophils in mucosa, and Nancy Histological index (NHI)≤ 1 were used to define histologic remission. Combined endoscopic-histologic remission was compared with endoscopic remission alone by Cox proportional hazards model and by two- and three-proportion analysis using pre-specified clinical outcomes.

results307 patients were recruited and 302 analysed. There was no difference in survival without specified clinical outcomes between PICaSSO defined endoscopic remission alone and endoscopic plus histologic remission in the rectum (HR 0.42, 95%CI 0.16-1.11 and HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.42-2.52 for Robarts Histological index and NHI respectively) at 12 months. There was however a significant survival advantage without specified clinical outcome events for UCEIS combined with histology compared with UCEIS alone (HR 0.30, 95%CI 0.12-0.75, p = 0.02) at 12 months (but not combined with NHI). For MES there was no advantage for predicting specified clinical outcomes at 12 months for endoscopy alone versus endoscopy plus histology, but there were differences in two and three proportion analysis at 6 months.

conclusionEndoscopic remission by VCE-PICaSSO alone was similar to combined endoscopic and histologic remission for predicting specified clinical outcomes at 12 months. Larger studies with specific therapeutic interventions are required to further confirm the findings.

Indexed as

Colitis, UlcerativeColonoscopyElectronicsEndoscopy, GastrointestinalHumansSeverity of Illness Indexendoscopic remissionhistological remissionmucosal healingulcerative colitisvirtual electronic chromoendoscopy - PICaSSO - clinical outcomes - prediction

Identifiers

PMID35194978
PMCPMC8911539
OpenAlexW4213420531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.