Mark Noar

Dr. Mark Noar

Endometriosis and Neuroenterology Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
22 February 2014 in Surgical Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Mark NoarMark Noar
Mark Noar
PSPatrick Squires
Patrick Squires
ENEmmanuelle Noar
Emmanuelle Noar
MLMartin Lee
Martin Lee




Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Mark NoarMark Noar
Mark Noar
JMJohn Robert Mathias
John Robert Mathias
Ajit KolatkarAjit Kolatkar
Ajit Kolatkar
Background/Objectives: Endometriosis represents substantial direct and indirect healthcare costs impacted by an absence of uniformly accurate, non-invasive diagnostic tools. We endeavored to demonstrate gastrointestinal myoelectrical activity (GIMA) biomarkers, unique to endometriosis, will allow non-invasive, uniformly accurate diagnosis or exclusion of endometriosis. Methods: Prospective open-label comparative study of 154 patients, age ≥ 18, with or without diagnosed endometriosis. Population included 62 non-endometriosis controls (Cohort 1), 43 subjects with surgically/histologically confirmed endometriosis (Cohort 2), and 49 subjects with abdominal pain and negative imaging (Cohort 3). Non-invasive electroviscerography (EVG) recorded GIMA biomarkers from three abdominal electrodes before and 30 min post water load protocol. Cohort 2 had postoperative EVG and Cohort 3 had preoperative EVG. Calculated specificity, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and predictive probability or C-statistic used univariate, multivariate, linear, and logistical regression analyses of the area under the curve (AUC) at all frequency and time points, including age and pain covariants. Results: The non-endometriosis cohort differed significantly from the endometriosis cohorts (p < 0.001) for median (IQR) and AUC percent frequency distribution of power at baseline, 10 min, 20 min, and 30 min post water load at all frequency ranges: 15–20 cpm, 30–40 cpm, and 40–50 cpm. The endometriosis cohorts were statistically similar (p > 0.05). GIMA biomarker threshold scoring demonstrated 95%/91% sensitivity and PPV, 96%/95% specificity and NPV, and a C-statistic of >99%/98%, respectively, for age subsets. GIMA biomarkers in Cohort 3 predicted 47/49 subjects positive and 2/49 negative for endometriosis, confirmed surgically. Hormonal therapy, surgical stage, nor pain score affected diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions: EVG with GIMA biomarker detection distinguished participants with and without endometriosis based upon endometriosis-specific GIMA biomarkers threshold scoring.

26 August 2024
Verified
Preprint
Open access
Mark NoarMark Noar
Mark Noar
JMJohn Mathias
John Mathias
AKAjit Kolatkar
Ajit Kolatkar
Objective: Validate diagnostic accuracy of new unique biomarker, gastrointestinal myoelectrical activity (GIMA), detected by electroviscerography (EVG) with Ai-derived disease threshold score calculation to noninvasively diagnose endometriosis. Design: Multicenter prospective blinded trial Setting: Women’s Healthcare Center Population of Sample: 165 patients with and without endometriosis diagnosis Methods: Initial 50 patients meeting inclusion criteria in 165-patient multicenter prospective GIMA biomarker trial were selected for interim analysis. Study population included women 27-55 years old, 25 with diagnosis of endometriosis and 25 non-endometriosis controls. Clinical and GIMA data were collected between February 2007 and September 2017, at all harvesting time points and frequency bands using EVG. Ai-derived threshold score calculations used area under the curve (AUC), age and standardized pain scores variables. Main Outcome Measures: Specificity, sensitivity, NPV, PPV and predictive probability or C-Statistic from logistical regression analyses of all AUC frequency and time points. Results: Non-endometriosis versus endometriosis cohort interim analysis differed significantly (p<0.001) for median (IQR), AUC values, and percent frequency power distribution at baseline, 10-minute, 20-minute, and 30-minute post water-load at frequency ranges 15-20cpm, 30-40cpm, 40-50cpm and 50-60cpm. GIMA threshold scoring revealed sensitivity and PPV of 96%, specificity and NPV of 96% and C-statistic of 100%. Ai-derived GIMA biomarkers threshold scoring predicted 25/25 subjects positive and negative for endometriosis, with surgical confirmation. Hormonal therapy, surgical stage, age nor pain score affected diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions: EVG GIMA biomarker data with Ai-derived threshold scoring accurately distinguished participants with and without endometriosis. This interim analysis supports continued investigation of GIMA biomarkers to diagnose endometriosis.