ArticleTherapeutic advances in chronic disease2013
The management of refractory coeliac disease.
Article in Therapeutic advances in chronic disease, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Celiac Disease Deep Learning Image Classification Using Convolutional Neural Networks.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Article
- Improving outcomes of refractory celiac disease - current and emerging treatment strategies.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Approach to patients with refractory coeliac disease.F1000Research · 2016Review
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A significant proportion of patients with coeliac disease are 'nonresponsive' to gluten withdrawal. Most cases of nonresponsive coeliac disease are due to persisting gluten ingestion. Refractory coeliac disease (RCD) is currently defined by persistent symptoms and signs of malabsorption after gluten exclusion for 12 months with ongoing intestinal villous atrophy. Primary (without initial response to diet) and secondary (relapse following response to diet) RCD is recognized. RCD is further classified as type I or type II based on the absence or presence of a population of aberrant intestinal lymphocytes. Quality of dietetic advice and support is fundamental, and lack of objective corroboration of gluten exclusion may result in over-identification of RCD I, particularly in those cases with persisting antibody responses. Over-reliance on lymphocyte clonality similarly may result in over-diagnosis of RCD II which requires careful quantification of aberrant lymphocyte populations. Management of RCD should be undertaken in specialist centres. It requires initial intensive dietary supervision, strict gluten exclusion and subsequent re-evaluation. There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend specific treatments. Steroids are often used in both RCD I and II (albeit with little objective evidence of benefit in RCD II), and azathioprine as steroid-sparing therapy in RCD I. There is growing evidence for the use of cladribine in RCD II with autologous stem cell transplantation in nonresponders, but this requires further multicentre evaluation. There remains considerable controversy regarding the diagnosis, treatment and surveillance of RCD: international consensus in these areas is urgently required to facilitate future therapeutic advances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.