4.7 Article

Evaluation of the Role of Faecal Calprotectin in the Management of Psoriatic Patients under Treatment with Biologic Drugs

Journal

BIOMEDICINES
Volume 10, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10112968

Keywords

calprotectin; faecal calprotectin; psoriasis; biological therapy; inflammatory bowel disease

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study confirmed the potential of fecal calprotectin levels as a valuable tool for evaluating intestinal inflammation management in psoriatic patients, especially those undergoing biological therapy. The research also found that IL23 inhibitors significantly reduced calprotectin levels after treatment, whereas anti-IL17 drugs did not have the same effect.
Background: Fecal calprotectin has emerged as a significant, validated, and non-invasive biomarker allowing for the evaluation of inflammatory bowel disease. Our study assessed the reliability of the use of faecal calprotectin as a valuable tool in the management of psoriatic patients on biological therapy. Methods: This was a single-centre prospective study including adult patients affected by moderate-to-severe psoriasis starting biological therapy. Faecal calprotectin levels were evaluated at baseline and at week 24 (W24) of treatment in all enrolled patients. Results: Overall, 129 patients were enrolled. The mean baseline faecal calprotectin levels were 74.7 mu g/g and a significant reduction was detected at W24 of biological therapy (57.5 mu g/g). An analysis of faecal CP values stratified by therapy type was performed. No significant reduction was assessed at W24 for any of the anti-IL17 drugs, whereas a significant reduction was detected for all IL23 inhibitors. Conclusions: Our study showed the potential use of faecal CP levels as a valuable tool for exploring intestinal inflammation in the management of psoriatic patients undergoing treatment with biologic drugs.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available