4.5 Review

A Systematic Review of Measurement of Endoscopic Disease Activity and Mucosal Healing in Crohn's Disease: Recommendations for Clinical Trial Design

Journal

INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES
Volume 20, Issue 10, Pages 1850-1861

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1097/MIB.0000000000000131

Keywords

Crohn's disease; Crohn's disease endoscopic index of severity; endoscopic indices; mucosal healing; outcome measures; simple endoscopic score for Crohn's disease; systematic review

Funding

  1. Abbott Laboratories
  2. Ferring
  3. MSD Pharma
  4. Abbott
  5. ActoGeniX NV
  6. AGI Therapeutics Inc
  7. Alba Therapeutics Corp
  8. Albireo
  9. Alfa Wasserman
  10. Amgen
  11. AM-Pharma BV
  12. Anaphore
  13. Astellas
  14. Athersys Inc
  15. Atlantic Healthcare Ltd
  16. Aptalis
  17. BioBalance Corp
  18. Boehringer-Ingelheim
  19. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  20. Celgene
  21. Celek Pharmaceuticals
  22. Cellerix SL
  23. Cerimon Pharmaceuticals
  24. ChemoCentryx
  25. CoMentis
  26. Cosmo Technologies
  27. Coronado Biosciences
  28. Cytokine Pharmasciences
  29. Eagle Pharmaceuticals
  30. EnGene Inc
  31. Eli Lilly
  32. Enteromedics
  33. Exagen Diagnostics Inc
  34. Ferring Pharmaceuticals
  35. Flexion Therapeutics Inc
  36. Funxional Therapeutics Ltd
  37. Genzyme Corp
  38. Gilead Sciences
  39. Given Imaging
  40. GlaxoSmithKline
  41. Human Genome Sciences
  42. Ironwood Pharmaceuticals
  43. Janssen Pharmaceutical Research & Development, LLC
  44. KaloBios Pharmaceuticals
  45. Lexicon Pharmaceuticals
  46. Lycera Corp
  47. Medea Pharmaceuticals
  48. Merck Research Laboratories
  49. Merck Serono
  50. Millenium Pharmaceuticals
  51. Nisshin Kyorin Pharmaceuticals
  52. Novo Nordisk
  53. NPS Pharmaceuticals
  54. Optimer Pharmaceuticals
  55. Orexigen Therapeutics Inc
  56. PDL Biopharma
  57. Pfizer
  58. Procter and Gamble
  59. Prometheus Laboratories
  60. ProtAb Ltd
  61. Purgenesis Technologies Inc
  62. Relypsa Inc
  63. Roche
  64. Salient Pharmaceuticals
  65. Salix Pharmaceuticals
  66. Santarus
  67. Schering Plough
  68. Shire Pharmaceuticals
  69. Sigmoid Pharma Ltd
  70. Sirtris Pharmaceuticals
  71. SLA Pharma UK Ltd
  72. Targacept
  73. Teva Pharmaceuticals
  74. Therakos
  75. Tilliotts Pharma AG
  76. TxCell SA
  77. UCB Pharma
  78. Viamet Pharmaceuticals
  79. Vascular Biogenics Ltd
  80. Warner Chilcott UK Ltd
  81. Wyeth
  82. Genentech
  83. Milennium Pharmaceuticals
  84. Novartis
  85. Abbott/AbbVie
  86. Astra Zeneca
  87. Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS)
  88. Janssen Biotech (Centocor)
  89. JnJ/Janssen, Roche/Genentech
  90. Millennium
  91. Receptos
  92. Sanofi
  93. Tillotts

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic idiopathic inflammatory disorder of the gastrointestinal tract. Recently, mucosal healing has been proposed as a goal of therapy because clinical symptoms are subjective. Evaluative indices that measure endoscopic disease activity are required to define mucosal healing for clinical trials. The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess the existing evaluative indices that measure disease activity in CD and evaluate their role as outcome measures in clinical trials. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PubMed, the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), and DDW abstracts to identify randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials that used a relevant evaluative index from inception to February 2013. The data obtained from these trials were reviewed and summarized. Results: The initial literature searches identified 2300 citations. After duplicates were removed, 1454 studies remained. After application of the apriori inclusion and exclusion criteria, 109 articles were included and 3 were identified with handsearches. In total, 9 evaluative indices for CD were identified and reviewed. The Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS) and the Simple Endoscopic Score in Crohn's Disease (SES-CD) are indices with the most extensively described operating properties. Conclusions: Both the endoscopic evaluative instrument selected and the definition chosen for mucosal healing affect the validity of assessing endoscopic disease activity during a clinical trial for CD. Currently, the CDEIS and SES-CD have the most data regarding operating properties; however, further validation is required.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available