Evidence Hub

Development of an Index Score for Intestinal Inflammation-Associated Dysbiosis Using Real-World Stool Test Results

Lihong Chen, C. Reynolds, R. David, Amy Peace Brewer

Digestive Diseases and Sciences, 2019

173,221 participants · 15 citations

Abstract

Background Gut microbiota play an important role in human health. However, the application of gut microbiome in regular clinical practice is limited by interindividual variations and complexity of test results. Hypothesis It is possible to address interindividual variation by using large data-based exploratory-pattern analysis. Methods The current study was conducted using a large data set ( n = 173,221) of nonselective incoming patients’ test results from a stool test. The data set included assays for the detection of 24 selected commensal microorganisms and multiple biomarkers in feces. Patients were grouped based on their levels of inflammation biomarkers such as calprotectin, eosinophil protein X, and IgA. Group mean values of biomarkers and commensal microbes were used in an exploratory-pattern analysis for association from which an index score for intestinal inflammation-associated dysbiosis (IAD) was developed. The IAD score was evaluated in one questionnaire-based study ( n = 7263) and one prospective case series study ( n = 122) with patients of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and celiac disease. Results We identified a microbial profile strongly associated with fecal inflammation biomarkers. Developed on the pattern of the microbial profile, the IAD score demonstrated a strong association with fecal inflammation biomarkers and was significantly different between patients with IBD and those with IBS or celiac disease. Conclusion…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 173,221 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free