Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36292026›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

New Faecal Calprotectin Assay by IDS: Validation and Comparison to DiaSorin Method.

Vincent Castiglione, Maëlle Berodes, Pierre Lukas, Edouard Louis, Etienne Cavalier, Laurence Lutteri

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vincent CastiglioneDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, CHU Sart-Tilman, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0778-0145
Maëlle BerodesDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, CHU Sart-Tilman, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Pierre LukasDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, CHU Sart-Tilman, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1071-9057
Edouard LouisDepartment of Gastroenterology, CHU Sart-Tilman, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Etienne CavalierDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, CHU Sart-Tilman, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0947-2226
Laurence LutteriDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, CHU Sart-Tilman, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
University of Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The faecal calprotectin (FC) measurement is used for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) diagnosis and follow-up. The aim of this study was to validate for the first time the new IDS FC extraction device and immunoassay kit, and to compare it with the DiaSorin test in patients with and without IBD. Methods: First, the precision of the IDS assay and its stability were assessed. Then, 379 stool extracts were analysed with the IDS kit on iSYS and compared with a DiaSorin Liaison XL assay. Results: The intra- and inter-assay CVs did not exceed 5%. The stool samples were stable up to 4 weeks at −20 °C. Lot-to-lot comparison showed a good correlation (Lot1 = 1.06 × Lot2 + 0.60; p > 0.05). The Passing and Bablok regression showed no significant deviation from linearity between the two methods (IDS = 1.06 × DiaSorin − 0.6; p > 0.05; concordance correlation coefficient = 0.93). According to the recommended cut-offs, the IDS assay identified more IBD and irritable bowel syndrome patients than DiaSorin, which had more borderline results (16 vs. 20%, respectively). Conclusions: The IDS faecal calprotectin had good analytical validation parameters. Compared to the DiaSorin method, it showed comparable results, but slightly outperformed it in the identification of more IBD patients and active disease.

Indexed as

faecal calprotectininflammatory bowel diseasemethod comparison

Identifiers

PMID36292026
PMCPMC9600005
OpenAlexW4297539903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.