Deep‐learning system for real‐time differentiation between Crohn's disease, intestinal Behçet's disease, and intestinal tuberculosis

Author(s):  
Jung Min Kim ◽  
Jun Gu Kang ◽  
Sungwon Kim ◽  
Jae Hee Cheon

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jihye Park ◽  
Daeun Jeong ◽  
Youn Wook Chung ◽  
Seunghan Han ◽  
Da Hye Kim ◽  
...  

AbstractIntestinal Behçet’s disease (BD) and Crohn’s disease (CD) present similar manifestations, but there are no specific diagnostic tests to differentiate them. We used a proteomic approach to discover novel diagnostic biomarkers specific to intestinal BD. Colon mucosa tissue samples were obtained from patients with intestinal BD or CD using colonoscopy-guided biopsy of the affected bowel. Peptides from seven intestinal BD and seven CD patients were extracted and labeled using tandem mass tag (TMT) reagents. The labeled peptides were identified and quantified using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS). The proteins were further validated using immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis with tissue samples and an ELISA test with serum samples from 20 intestinal BD and 20 CD patients. Using TMT/LC–MS/MS-based proteomic quantification, we identified 39 proteins differentially expressed between intestinal BD and CD. Beta-2 glycoprotein 1 (APOH) and maltase-glucoamylase (MGAM) showed higher intensity in the IHC staining of intestinal BD tissues than in CD tissues. The serum MGAM level was higher in intestinal BD patients. Proteomic analysis revealed that some proteins were differentially expressed in patients with intestinal BD compared with those with CD. Differential MGAM expression in intestinal BD suggests its role as a potential novel diagnostic biomarker.







2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S164-S165
Author(s):  
J Park ◽  
J Daeun ◽  
C Youn Wook ◽  
C Jae Hee ◽  
R Ji-Hwan

Abstract Background Intestinal Behçet’s disease (BD) and Crohn’s disease (CD) present similar manifestations, but there are no specific pathognomonic clinical, laboratory, or histological diagnostic tests to differentiate intestinal BD from CD. We used a proteomic approach to discover a novel diagnostic biomarker specific to intestinal BD. Methods The colon mucosa tissue samples were obtained using colonoscopy-guided biopsy of the affected bowel from patients with intestinal BD or CD at the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic of Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea. Peptides from seven intestinal BD and seven CD patients were extracted and labeled using tandem mass tag (TMT) reagents. The labeled peptides were identified and quantified using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The differentially expressed proteins were further validated using immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis with tissue samples and an ELISA test with serum samples from 20 intestinal BD and 20 CD patients. Results A total of 3,266 proteins were identified using TMT/LC-MS/MS-based proteomic quantification, including 39 candidate proteins differentially expressed between intestinal BD and CD. Beta-2 glycoprotein 1 (APOH) and maltase-glucoamylase (MGAM) showed significantly higher intensity in the IHC staining of the intestinal BD tissues than that of CD tissues. Furthermore, the serum MGAM level was significantly higher in patients with intestinal BD than in patients with CD. Conclusion Our proteomic analysis revealed that some proteins were differentially expressed in intestinal BD patients compared to CD patients. Differential MGAM expression in intestinal BD suggests its role as a potential novel diagnostic biomarker in the differentiation of intestinal BD from CD.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document