Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28161854›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2017

Diagnostic Yield of Isolated Deamidated Gliadin Peptide Antibody Elevation for Celiac Disease.

Nicholas A Hoerter, Sarah E Shannahan, Jorge Suarez, Suzanne K Lewis, Peter H R Green, Daniel A Leffler, Benjamin Lebwohl

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Celiac Disease, Gluten Sensitivity, and Diet Management.Current gastroenterology reports · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The global burden of coeliac disease: opportunities and challenges.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Celiac disease: Understandings in diagnostic, nutritional, and medicinal aspects.International journal of immunopathology and pharmacology
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nicholas A HoerterThe Celiac Disease Center at Columbia University, 180 Fort Washington Avenue, Suite 936, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Sarah E ShannahanCeliac Disease Center, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, East Campus, Dana 601, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Jorge SuarezThe Celiac Disease Center at Columbia University, 180 Fort Washington Avenue, Suite 936, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Suzanne K LewisThe Celiac Disease Center at Columbia University, 180 Fort Washington Avenue, Suite 936, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Peter H R GreenThe Celiac Disease Center at Columbia University, 180 Fort Washington Avenue, Suite 936, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Daniel A LefflerCeliac Disease Center, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, East Campus, Dana 601, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Benjamin LebwohlThe Celiac Disease Center at Columbia University, 180 Fort Washington Avenue, Suite 936, New York, NY, 10032, USA. bl114@cumc.columbia.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSerologic testing for celiac disease includes tissue transglutaminase and endomysial antibodies. In addition to these tools, assays for deamidated gliadin peptide antibodies have been shown to have sensitivity and specificity that are comparable to tissue transglutaminase testing, and are increasingly being used for celiac disease testing.

aimsThe goal of this study is to evaluate the utility of deamidated gliadin peptide (DGP) testing in the setting of a negative tissue transglutaminase (TTG) IgA test.

methodsWe reviewed the records of all patients seen at two U.S. celiac disease referral centers and identified those who had an elevated DGP IgA and/or IgG in the setting of a negative TTG IgA. Of these patients, those who underwent duodenal biopsy while on a gluten-containing diet were included. Patients with prior biopsy-proven celiac disease or prior TTG IgA positivity were excluded. The results of the biopsy were used as the gold standard for celiac disease diagnosis, and patients with villous atrophy (Marsh class 3) on duodenal biopsy were considered to have celiac disease.

resultsBetween the two institutions, 84 patients were identified with negative TTG IgA and positive DGP IgA or IgG who also had duodenal biopsies performed while maintaining a gluten-containing diet. Of these patients, 13 patients (15.5%; 95% CI 8.5-25.0%) were found to have celiac disease on duodenal biopsy.

conclusionsDGP antibody testing can identify cases of celiac disease in TTG-negative individuals, although the low positive predictive value suggests that the yield may be low.

Indexed as

AntibodiesCeliac DiseaseFemaleGliadinHumansImmunoglobulin AImmunoglobulin GMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificitySerologic TestsAntibodiesGliadinImmunoglobulin AImmunoglobulin GCeliac diseaseGliadinSerologic testsTissue transglutaminase

Identifiers

PMID28161854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.