ArticleJournal of Crohn's & colitis2025
Development and validation of a novel patient-reported outcome for microscopic colitis-Microscopic Colitis Score (MCS).
Article in Journal of Crohn's & colitis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimsDespite debilitating symptoms, no standardized disease severity index exists for microscopic colitis (MC). This gap hinders alignment with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) standards, which emphasize the importance of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in new therapy approval. This study aimed to validate the Microscopic Colitis Symptom Questionnaire (MCSQ) and develop the Microscopic Colitis Score (MCS), a novel disease severity index.
methodThis prospective, multicenter study included 131 patients with biopsy-confirmed MC (67 remission, 64 active disease). Patients completed MCSQ and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessments [IBDQ-32, Short Health Scale (SHS)] at baseline and follow-up. Clustering analysis systematically identified distinct disease severity groups. MCS was developed as a composite score derived from MCSQ.
resultsFactor analysis revealed a three-factor MCSQ model with good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.88). Test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.88) and responsiveness to treatment (P < .01) of all MCSQ items were high. MCS, ranging from 0 (asymptomatic) to 15 (maximum symptoms), correlated strongly with HRQoL measures such as IBDQ-32 total score (rp=-0.78), IBDQ-32 bowel symptoms (rp=-0.80), and SHS bowel symptoms (rp=0.69). Receiver-operating characteristic curves indicated that MCS could accurately identify patients in remission [as per Hjortswang criteria; area under the curve (AUC) = 0.85], as well as mild (AUC = 0.97), moderate (AUC = 0.93), or severe disease (AUC = 0.96).
conclusionsMCSQ and MCS are valid, reliable, and responsive tools that meet FDA and EMA standards. Both accurately reflect the diverse symptoms of MC. Compared to the binary Hjortswang criteria, MCS provides a nuanced evaluation of disease activity and holds promise for assessing therapeutic efficacy in future trials.
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.