Value of GastroPanel in the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis

• Published in: Experimental and therapeutic medicine Vol. 22; no. 5
• Main Authors: Grad, Cosmin, Pop, Andrei, Gaborean, Emil, Grad, Simona, Dumitrascu, Dan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Athens Spandidos Publications 01-11-2021; Spandidos Publications UK Ltd; D.A. Spandidos
• Subjects: Atrophy; Biomarkers; Biopsy; Diagnosis; Endoscopy; Equipment and supplies; Gastric cancer; Gastritis; Laboratories; Medical diagnosis; Methods; Patients; Physiological aspects; Serodiagnosis; Serology; Romania
• ISSN: 1792-0981; 1792-1015
• DOI: 10.3892/etm.2021.10782

Analysis of serum biomarkers for the assessment of atrophic gastritis (AG), considered as precursor of the intestinal type of gastric cancer, is of growing interest. The combination of pepsinogen (PG), gastrin-17 (G17) and anti-Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) antibody serological assays (panel test) is a non-invasive tool for the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis. However, the diagnostic reliability of this test remains uncertain. The aim of our study was to assess the diagnostic performance of the serum panel test (GastroPanel) for the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis. From dyspeptic patients, endoscopic biopsy samples (two from the gastric corpus and two from the antrum) and blood samples were collected. The determination of sPGI, sPGII, sG17 and IgG antibodies to H. pylori (H.p IgG) was performed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (GastroPanel; Biohit Oyj). Histopathology results were compared with GastroPanel values. Sixty patients were included: 35 (58.3%) females and 25 (41.66%) males; mean age 67.63 [+ or -] 9.36 years; 45% H. pylori-positive. A total of 65% of patients had atrophic gastritis. There were no significant differences between the levels of biomarkers and localization of atrophy. The ratio PG1/PG2 was lower in patients with multifocal atrophy; the difference being close to the threshold of statistical significance. In cases of intestinal metaplasia the values of G17, PG1, PG2, H.p IgG were not statistically altered compared to those without intestinal metaplasia; only the ratio PG1/PG2 was lower in intestinal metaplasia; the difference being almost of statistical significance. Our results revealed that, GastroPanel values did not differ depending on the severity of the atrophy. Biomarkers used by GastroPanel do not have enough accuracy for use in the diagnosis of atrophy in the population studied. A low accuracy only for the ratio PG1/PG2 in patients with multifocal atrophy was found. However, our data revealed a correlation in detecting intestinal metaplasia. Key words: GastroPanel, screening, atrophic gastritis, intestinal metaplasia, gastric cancer