ArticleGastro hep advances2022
Fecal Leukocyte Esterase, an Alternative Biomarker to Fecal Calprotectin in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Pilot Series.
Article in Gastro hep advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Leucocyte Esterase Reagent Strips for Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis in Cirrhosis With Ascites.Health science reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Fecal calprotectin (FC) is a noninvasive biomarker used in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management and risk stratification of nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms. Leukocyte esterase is an inexpensive and widely available point-of-care inflammatory marker present on urinalysis test strips. We aim to assess the diagnostic accuracy of fecal leukocyte esterase (FLE) relative to FC and endoscopy and demonstrate its use as an alternative biomarker for IBD. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 70 patients who had FC ordered as part of standard clinical care also received FLE testing. FLE levels were compared with various FC cutoff values and endoscopy and pathology findings as the gold standard. Results: As the FC cutoff increased from 50 to 500 μg/g, FLE sensitivity increased from 67% to 95% while the specificity decreased from 86% to 76%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve increased from 0.79 to 0.90. An FLE of ≥1+ had the best test characteristics. Among patients who underwent endoscopic evaluation, FLE demonstrated an identical sensitivity (75%) and specificity (86%) to FC in predicting endoscopic inflammation. AUROC was 0.80 for FLE and 0.85 for FC with an optimal cutoff of ≥2+ and 301 μg/g, respectively. When used to distinguish between patients with active IBD and no/inactive IBD, FLE had a sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 90%, comparable with the 84% and 83%, respectively, of FC. AUROC was 0.88 for FLE and 0.91 for FC with an optimal cutoff of ≥2+ and 145 μg/g, respectively. Conclusion: FLE demonstrates adequate correlation and comparable accuracy with FC in predicting endoscopic inflammation and distinguishing between patients with active vs inactive IBD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.