PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 19, 2026Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition0 citationsOpen Access

A novel diagnostic serum protein signature for pediatric inflammatory bowel disease

View Full Paper
CMC Bache-Wiig MathisenNNNiklas NyströmIBIgor Bazov

Key Points

  • The research aims to create a blood-based diagnostic protein signature for pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (PIBD) to address diagnostic delays.
  • Utilized proximity extension assay to analyze proteins in plasma samples.
  • Conducted study in a Swedish inception cohort of treatment-naïve pediatric patients.
  • Validated findings in an independent Norwegian pediatric cohort.
  • Estimated diagnostic performance with area under the curve (AUC) metrics.
  • Identified 26 differentially regulated proteins in the discovery cohort and 29 in the validation cohort.
  • Developed a diagnostic model with 31 proteins, achieving an AUC of 0.83.
  • Created a clinically relevant biomarker consisting of hsCRP and seven additional proteins, yielding an AUC of 0.85.
  • The new protein signature outperformed hsCRP in diagnostic capacity.

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Diagnostic delay is common in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (PIBD), and fecal calprotectin (FCP) is often limited by challenges with sample collection. Therefore, we aimed to identify and validate a blood‐based diagnostic protein signature of PIBD. Methods Proteins were analyzed using proximity extension assay in plasma samples from treatment‐naïve pediatric patients in a Swedish inception cohort referred for suspected IBD and validated in an independent Norwegian population‐based pediatric inception cohort. Diagnostic performance was estimated by the area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results The discovery cohort included 58 patients with PIBD and 36 symptomatic controls without evidence of IBD, while the validation cohort consisted of 79 patients with PIBD and 37 symptomatic controls. In total, 154 proteins were examined. Univariable analyses identified 26 differentially regulated proteins for PIBD versus symptomatic controls in the discovery cohort ( q < 0.05), whereas 29 proteins were differentially regulated in the validation cohort. Using regularized logistic regression, we identified a diagnostic model of 31 proteins that differentiated PIBD from symptomatic controls in the discovery cohort (AUC = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.74–0.90). The protein signature was further reduced to a clinically relevant biomarker consisting of high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein (hsCRP) and seven other proteins with diagnostic capacity (AUC = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.78–0.92) outperforming hsCRP in the validation cohort ( p = 0.006). Conclusions We identified and validated a blood‐based protein signature for PIBD with superior diagnostic performance compared to hsCRP. Given the challenges of fecal sample collection, further assay development may enable integration of these biomarkers into diagnostic pathways for PIBD. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02727959.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Mathisen et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6996a788ecb39a600b3ed40fhttps://doi.org/10.1002/jpn3.70379
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper