RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in clinical and endoscopic remission may still experience disease relapse. Therefore, there is a need to identify outcome predictors. Recently, the role of neutrophils in predicting outcomes in ulcerative colitis (UC) has been highlighted. Furthermore, the impairment of intestinal barrier plays a key role in forecasting disease outcomes in IBD. OBJECTIVE: This observational study aimed to assess the predictive role of neutrophils according to tissue localization and intestinal barrier protein expression in IBD. METHODS: IBD patients in clinical remission who underwent colonoscopy between January 2020 and June 2022 at two tertiary referral centres were enrolled. Patients with Mayo Endoscopic Score ≤1 (UC) and Simple Endoscopic Score ≤6 (Crohn's disease) were included. Histological activity was assessed using validated scores. Experienced pathologists evaluated neutrophil localization in the epithelium and lamina propria and immunohistochemical expression of Claudin-2 and junctional adhesion molecule A (JAM-A). RESULTS: Of 60 UC and 76 CD patients, 59.7% had histological activity. 25.8% of patients developed an adverse outcome within 12 months. Neutrophils in the epithelium predicted adverse outcomes for UC (hazard ratio [HR] 5.198, p = 0.01) and CD (HR 4.377, p = 0.03) patients in endoscopic remission. Claudin-2 expression correlated with endoscopic and histological activity and predicted outcomes in UC. Similar results were found for JAM-A in CD despite this protein showing less specificity as a barrier predictor of outcome. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the potential role of epithelial neutrophil localization and Claudin-2 'leaky gut' expression as tools for predicting IBD outcomes and guiding further patient-tailored therapy.
RESUMO
Overweight and obese men and women (24-61 yr of age) were recruited into a randomized trial to compare the effects of a low-fat (LF) vs. a low-carbohydrate (LC) diet on weight loss. Thirty-one subjects completed all 10 wk of the diet intervention (retention, 78%). Subjects on the LF diet consumed an average of 17.8% of energy from fat, compared with their habitual intake of 36.4%, and had a resulting energy restriction of 2540 kJ/d. Subjects on the LC diet consumed an average of 15.4% carbohydrate, compared with habitual intakes of about 50% carbohydrate, and had a resulting energy restriction of 3195 kJ/d. Both groups of subjects had significant weight loss over the 10 wk of diet intervention and nearly identical improvements in body weight and fat mass. LF subjects lost an average of 6.8 kg and had a decrease in body mass index of 2.2 kg/m2, compared with a loss of 7.0 kg and decrease in body mass index of 2.1 kg/m2 in the LC subjects. The LF group better preserved lean body mass when compared with the LC group; however, only the LC group had a significant decrease in circulating insulin concentrations. Group results indicated that the diets were equally effective in reducing systolic blood pressure by about 10 mm Hg and diastolic pressure by 5 mm Hg and decreasing plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 bioactivity. Blood beta-hydroxybutyrate concentrations were increased in the LC only, at the 2- and 4-wk time points. These data suggest that energy restriction achieved by a very LC diet is equally effective as a LF diet strategy for weight loss and decreasing body fat in overweight and obese adults.