ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2016
Assessment of a Test for the Screening and Diagnosis of Celiac Disease.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of slow responsiveness and partial mucosal recovery in adult patients with celiac disease.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2023Article
- Antibodies against neo-epitope of microbial and human transglutaminase complexes as biomarkers of childhood celiac disease.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2020Article
- Autoantibody testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-a case in which the solid phase decides on success and failure.Heliyon · 2020Article
- Developments in the HCV Screening Technologies Based on the Detection of Antigens and Antibodies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Celiac disease in the East and the West: Bridging the gaps between the guidelines and their implementation in daily practice is mandatory.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCeliac disease (CD) is an immune-mediated intolerance to dietary gluten, affecting genetically predisposed individuals. ELISA-based serological tests help to decide if further duodenal biopsy is necessary, for this the diagnostic kits have to be accurate, specific, and sensible. In this study, we investigate the performance of an ELISA that uses the purified cross-linked complex of tissue transglutaminase and gliadin, referred as the "neoepitope" (AESKULISA® tTG New Generation), as antigen.
methodsWe evaluated 41 newly diagnosed celiac patients, 18 celiac patients on gluten-free diet, and 169 controls, comprising healthy subjects, patients affected by other autoimmune diseases, and patients affected by several non-autoimmune diseases. RESULTS AND
conclusionThe assay has an excellent performance. Due to its high level of diagnostic accuracy, this assay constitutes a new approach for the screening of celiac patients not only for the diagnosis of CD, but also for monitoring patients on gluten-free diet and their compliance. Moreover, cases of neoepitope-positive subjects who were tested negative with "classical" serological markers could have a predictive value for this pathology. This aspect will require further studies of elaboration.
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.