ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2021
Serologic diagnosis of celiac disease: May it be suitable for adults?
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intraepithelial Lymphocytes and LAIR1 Expression in Celiac Disease.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Challenges in the Pediatric Celiac Disease Diagnosis: An Up-to-Date Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Laboratory and Clinical Practices in the Study of Coeliac Disease in Children and Adults: Recommendations from a Spanish Multicentre Survey.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Celiac Disease: A Transitional Point of View.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Uncovering the gap: Coeliac disease knowledge among healthcare professionals in the Danube region.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Feasibility of a "No-Biopsy" Approach for the Diagnosis of Celiac Disease in Symptomatic Adults.Cureus · 2024Article
- Evaluating CD4 and Foxp3 mRNA Expression in Tissue Specimens of Celiac Disease and Colorectal Cancer Patients.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
- Article
- The correct methodological approach to the diagnosis of celiac disease: the point of view of the pathologist.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnosis of coeliac disease (CD) in adult patients requires the simultaneous assessment of clinical presentation, serology, and typical histological picture of villous atrophy. However, several years ago, the European Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition guidelines approved new criteria for the diagnosis in children: Biopsy could be avoided when anti-transglutaminase antibody (TGA) values exceed the cut-off of × 10 upper limit of normal (ULN) and anti-endomysium antibodies are positive, independently from value. This "no biopsy" approach is a decisive need for pediatric population, allowing to avoid stressful endoscopic procedures in children, if unnecessary. This approach relies on the correlation existing in children between TGA levels and assessment of mucosal atrophy according to Marsh's classification. Several lines of evidence have shown that patients with villous atrophy have markedly elevated TGA levels. Therefore, we aim to perform a narrative review on the topic in adults. Despite that some studies confirmed that the × 10 ULN threshold value has a very good diagnostic performance, several lines of evidence in adults suggest that TGA cut off should be different from that of pediatric population for reaching a good correlation with histological picture. In conclusion, the heterogeneity of study reports as well as some conditions, which may hamper the serological diagnosis of CD (such as seronegative CD and non-celiac villous atrophy) and are much more common in adults than in children, could represent a limitation for the "no biopsy" approach to CD diagnosis in patients outside the pediatric age.
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.