Fecal calprotectin in healthy children aged 4-16 years

María Roca1, Ana Rodriguez Varela2, Eva Carvajal3

  • 1Celiac Disease and Digestive Immunopathology Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, P.O. Box 46026, Valencia, Spain. maria_roca@iislafe.es.

Scientific Reports
|November 26, 2020
PubMed

Insights

Establishing reference values for fecal calprotectin (fCP) in children is crucial. This study provides median and 95th percentile fCP levels for healthy children aged 4-16 years, noting age-related variations.

Area of Science:

  • Pediatric Gastroenterology
  • Clinical Chemistry
  • Biomarker Research

Background:

  • Reference values for fecal calprotectin (fCP) in pediatric populations remain incompletely defined.
  • Accurate fCP reference ranges are essential for diagnosing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in children.
  • Previous studies have lacked sufficient sample sizes to establish reliable pediatric fCP values.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To establish reference values for fecal calprotectin (fCP) in a large cohort of healthy children aged 4-16 years.
  • To analyze the age-related behavior of fCP concentrations in this demographic.
  • To determine if conclusive cut-off levels for fCP can be recommended for pediatric use.

Main Methods:

  • A prospective study design was employed.
  • fCP concentrations were measured in 212 healthy children aged 4-16 years.
  • Statistical analysis was performed to identify associations between fCP levels and age.

Main Results:

  • The median fCP concentration was 18.8 mg/kg, and the 95th percentile was 104.5 mg/kg in the studied healthy children.
  • A statistically significant association was observed between the 95th percentile of fCP concentrations and age (p < 0.001).
  • A nomogram for interpreting fCP results in children aged 4-16 years was developed.

Conclusions:

  • The study provides proposed reference values and a nomogram for fecal calprotectin (fCP) in children aged 4-16 years.
  • Age-dependent variations in fCP necessitate age-specific interpretation.
  • Further research is needed to validate these proposed values in clinical practice.