Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: One-third of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients show no response to infliximab (IFX) induction therapy, and approximately half of patients responding become unresponsive over time. Thus, identification of potential treatment response biomarkers are of great clinical significance. This study employs spectroscopy-based metabolic profiling of serum from patients with IBD treated with IFX and healthy subjects (1) to substantiate the use of spectroscopy as a semi-invasive diagnostic tool, (2) to identify potential biomarkers of treatment response and (3) to characterise the metabolic changes during management of patients with tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors. METHODS: H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. Data were analysed with principal components analysis and orthogonal projection to latent structures discriminant analysis using SIMCA-P+ v12 and MATLAB. RESULTS: Metabolic profiles were significantly different between active ulcerative colitis and controls, active Crohn's disease and controls, and quiescent Crohn's disease and controls. Metabolites holding differential power belonged primarily to lipids and phospholipids with proatherogenic characteristics and metabolites in the pyruvate metabolism, suggestive of an intense inflammation-driven energy demand. IBD patients not responding to IFX were identified as a potentially distinct group based on their metabolic profile, although no applicable response biomarkers could be singled out in the current setting. CONCLUSION: H NMR spectroscopy of serum samples is a powerful semi-invasive diagnostic tool in flaring IBD. With its use, we provide unique insights into the metabolic changes taking place during induction treatment with IFX. Of distinct clinical relevance is the identification of a reversible proatherogenic lipid profile in IBD patients with active disease, which partially explains the increased risk of cardiovascular disease associated with IBD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bjerrum et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: