Faecal calprotectin effectively excludes inflammatory bowel disease in 789 symptomatic young adults with/without alarm symptoms: a prospective UK primary care cohort study

BACKGROUND

Primary care faecal calprotectin testing distinguishes inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) from functional gut disorder in young patients presenting with abdominal symptoms; however, previous evaluations have excluded patients with alarm symptoms.

AIMS

We sought to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of calprotectin to distinguish IBD from functional gut disorder in young adults in whom general practitioners (GPs) suspected IBD; including patients reporting gastrointestinal alarm symptoms. We hypothesised that calprotectin would reduce secondary care referrals and healthcare costs.

METHODS

We undertook a prospective cohort study of 789 young adults (18-46 years old) presenting with gastrointestinal symptoms to 49 local general practices that had undergone calprotectin testing (1053 tests: between Jan 2014 and May 2016) because of suspected IBD. We considered calprotectin levels of ≥100 μg/g positive. Primary and secondary care records over 12 months from the point of calprotectin testing were used as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Overall, 39% (308/789) patients reported gastrointestinal alarm symptoms and 6% (50/789) tested patients were diagnosed with IBD. The positive and negative predictive values of calprotectin testing for distinguishing IBD from functional gut disorder in patients with gastrointestinal alarm symptoms were 50% (95% CI 36%-64%) and 98% (96%-100%): and in patients without gastrointestinal alarm symptoms were 27% (16%-41%) and 99% (98%-100%), respectively. We estimate savings of 279 referrals and £160 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Calprotectin testing of young adults with suspected IBD in primary care accurately distinguishes IBD from functional gut disorder, even in patients with gastrointestinal alarm symptoms and reduces secondary care referrals and diagnostic healthcare costs.

Ethical issues and best practice in clinically based genomic research: Exeter Stakeholders Meeting Report

Current guidelines on consenting individuals to participate in genomic research are diverse. This creates problems for participants and also for researchers, particularly for clinicians who provide both clinical care and research to their patients. A group of 14 stakeholders met on 7 October 2015 in Exeter to discuss the ethical issues and the best practice arising in clinically based genomic research, with particular emphasis on the issue of returning results to study participants/patients in light of research findings affecting research and clinical practices. The group was deliberately multidisciplinary to ensure that a diversity of views was represented. This report outlines the main ethical issues, areas of best practice and principles underlying ethical clinically based genomic research discussed during the meeting. The main point emerging from the discussion is that ethical principles, rather than being formulaic, should guide researchers/clinicians to identify who the main stakeholders are to consult with for a specific project and to incorporate their voices/views strategically throughout the lifecycle of each project. We believe that the mix of principles and practical guidelines outlined in this report can contribute to current debates on how to conduct ethical clinically based genomic research.