ArticleFrontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland)2025
Prevalence of celiac disease in a Tunisian cohort.
Article in Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Accurate and non-invasive diagnostics of celiac disease are essential for effective patient management. Although small intestine biopsy remains the diagnostic gold standard, serological assays offer a promising alternative. This study evaluated the performance and concordance of immunoblot, indirect immunofluorescence test (IIFT), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in detecting celiac disease-specific autoantibodies in a Tunisian cohort, aiming to assess the potential of combining various assays to reduce reliance on invasive procedures. Methods: Serum samples from 80 celiac disease patients and appropriate controls were analyzed using three serological methods. IIFT was employed to detect IgA autoantibodies against endomysium using primate liver and human umbilical cord substrates. ELISA was used to quantify anti-tissue transglutaminase (tTG) IgA and deamidated gliadin peptide (DGP) autoantibodies. Immunoblots assessed additional autoantibodies (tTG, GAF-3X, and ASCA), along with further evaluation of IgG autoantibodies (intrinsic factor and parietal cell antibodies). Concordance among methods was evaluated. Results: IIFT detected anti-endomysium IgA autoantibodies in 100% (80/80) of celiac patients (in this cohort), with no positivity in controls. ELISA demonstrated that both tTG IgA and DGP autoantibodies were present in all celiac disease patients. All controls (n = 158) were ELISA-negative, indicating 100% specificity in both assays. Immunoblots revealed tTG IgA in 99% (79/80) of patients, while GAF-3X autoantibodies were detected in 94% (IgA) and 85% (IgG) of celiac patients. In addition, ASCA IgA autoantibodies were present in 31% of celiac disease patients, with minimal reactivity observed in controls. A Venn diagram illustrated high concordance among the assays for tTG autoantibody detection, reinforcing the reliability of this autoantibody marker. Conclusion: The robust and consistent detection of celiac disease-specific autoantibodies, particularly tTG IgA and DGP autoantibodies, across multiple serological platforms underscores their diagnostic utility. The high concordance among these markers supports the potential of combined autoantibody testing to serve as a non-invasive alternative to biopsy, thereby enhancing clinical management of celiac disease.
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.