SynthesisPloS one2019
Classical celiac disease is more frequent with a double dose of HLA-DQB1*02: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcriptomic analysis of intestine following administration of a transglutaminase 2 inhibitor to prevent gluten-induced intestinal damage in celiac disease.Nature immunology · 2024Trial
- Clinical settings in which human leukocyte antigen typing is still useful in the diagnosis of celiac disease.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Celiac Disease in Children: A 2023 Update.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2024Review
- Celiac Disease: A Review from Genetic to Treatment.Iranian biomedical journal · 2024Review
- Celiac disease diagnosis: transglutaminase, duodenal biopsy and genetic tests correlations.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
- Influence of HLA-DQ2.5 Dose on Clinical Picture of Unrelated Celiac Disease Patients.Nutrients · 2020Article
- Vaccinations and Immune Response in Celiac Disease.Vaccines · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsExperimental data suggest that the HLA-DQ2 gene dose has a strong quantitative effect on clinical outcomes and severity of celiac disease (CD). We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis with systematic review to investigate the association between HLA-DQB1*02 gene doses and the characteristics of CD.
methodsWe searched seven medical databases for studies discussing HLA-DQB1 gene dose in CD and various disease characteristics, such as clinical presentation, histology, age at diagnosis, and comorbidities. Odds ratios (OR, for categorical variables) and weighted mean differences (for age) were calculated to compare patients with a double dose of HLA-DQB1*02 versus those with single and zero doses. Heterogeneity was tested with I2-statistics and explored by study subgroups (children and adults).
resultsTwenty-four publications were eligible for meta-analysis. Classical CD was more frequent with a double versus single dose of the HLA-DQB1*02 allele (OR = 1.758, 95%CI: 1.148-2.692, I2 = 0.0%). In pediatric studies, gene dose effect was more prominent (OR = 2.082, 95%CI: 1.189-3.646, I2 = 0.0% and OR = 3.139, 95%CI: 1.142-8.630, I2 = 0.0% for the comparisons of double versus single and double versus zero dose, respectively). Atrophic histology was more prevalent with a double versus zero dose (OR = 2.626, CI: 1.060-6.505, I2 = 21.3%). We observed no gene dose effect regarding diarrhea, age at diagnosis, the severity of villous atrophy, and the association with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
conclusionA double dose of HLA-DQB1*02 gene seems to predispose patients to developing classical CD and villous atrophy. Risk stratification by HLA-DQB1*02 gene dose requires further clarification due to the limited available evidence.
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.