The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Discriminating IBD from IBS: Comparison of the test performance of fecal markers, blood leukocytes, CRP, and IBD antibodies
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Symptoms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) can overlap. We aimed to determine the accuracy of fecal markers, C-reactive protein (CRP), blood leukocytes, and antibody panels for discriminating IBD from IBS and to define a "best test." METHODS: We prospectively included 64 patients with IBD (36 Crohn's disease [CD], 28 ulcerative colitis [UC]), 30 with IBS, and 42 healthy controls. Besides CRP and blood leukocytes, blinded fecal samples were measured for calprotectin (PhiCal Test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]), lactoferrin (IBD-SCAN, ELISA), Hexagon-OBTI (immunochromatographic test for detection of human hemoglobin), and LEUKO-TEST (lactoferrin latex-agglutination test). Blinded serum samples were measured for the antibodies ASCA (ELISA) and pANCA (immunofluorescence). RESULTS: Overall accuracy of tests for discriminating IBD from IBS: IBD-SCAN 90%, PhiCal Test 89%, LEUKO-TEST 78%, Hexagon-OBTI 74%, CRP 73%, blood leukocytes 63%, CD antibodies (ASCA+/pANCA- or ASCA+/pANCA+) 55%, UC antibodies (pANCA+/ASCA-) 49%. ASCA and pANCA had an accuracy of 78% for detecting CD and 75% for detecting UC, respectively. The overall accuracy of IBD-SCAN and PhiCal Test combined with ASCA/pANCA for discriminating IBD from IBS was 92% and 91%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The PhiCal Test and IBD-SCAN are highly accurate for discriminating IBD from IBS. There is only marginal additional diagnostic accuracy when the PhiCal Test and IBD-SCAN are combined with ASCA and pANCA. ASCA and pANCA have a high specificity for IBD.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Lacy, B. E., Pimentel, M., Brenner, D. M., Chey, W. D., Keefer, L. A., Long, M. D., & Moshiree, B. (2021) · American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000001036 · Cited by 893
Calprotectin: from biomarker to biological function
Jukic, A., Bakiri, L., Wagner, E. F., Tilg, H., & Adolph, T. E. (2021) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2021-324855 · Cited by 500
Targownik, L. E., Sexton, K. A., Bernstein, M. T., Beatie, B., Sargent, M., Walker, J. R., & Graff, L. A. (2015) · American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1038/ajg.2015.147 · Cited by 157
Manolakis, A. C., Kapsoritakis, A. N., Tiaka, E. K., & Potamianos, S. P. (2011) · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · doi:10.1007/s10620-010-1494-9 · Cited by 96
Psychosocial predictors of irritable bowel syndrome diagnosis and symptom severity
Phillips, K., Wright, B. J., & Kent, S. (2013) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2013.08.002 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Schoepfer, A. M., Trummler, M., Seeholzer, P., Seibold-Schmid, B., & Seibold, F.
- Venue
- Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 32-39
- ISSN
- 1078-0998 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2054378007
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Discriminating IBD from IBS: Comparison of the test performance of fecal markers, blood leukocytes, CRP, and IBD antibodies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ibd.20275
- The paper
- Schoepfer, A. M., Trummler, M., Seeholzer, P., Seibold-Schmid, B., & Seibold, F. (2008). Discriminating IBD from IBS: Comparison of the test performance of fecal markers, blood leukocytes, CRP, and IBD antibodies. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1002/ibd.20275
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.