Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Wolf, Johannes
• Petroff, David
• Richter, Thomas
• Auth, Marcus KH
• Uhlig, Holm H
• Laass, Martin W
• Lauenstein, Peter
• Krahl, Andreas
• Händel, Norman
• de Laffolie, Jan
• Hauer, Almuthe C
• Kehler, Thomas
• Flemming, Gunter
• Schmidt, Frank
• Rodriques, Astor
• Hasenclever, Dirk
• Mothes, Thomas

Titel

Validation of Antibody-based Strategies for Diagnosis of Pediatric Celiac Disease Without Biopsy

Ist Teil von

• Gastroenterology (New York, N.Y. 1943), 2017-08, Vol.153 (2), p.410-419.e17

Ort / Verlag

United States: Elsevier Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2017

Quelle

MEDLINE

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Abstract Background and Aims A diagnosis of celiac disease is made based on clinical, genetic, serologic, and duodenal morphology features. Recent pediatric guidelines, based largely on retrospective data, propose omitting biopsy analysis for patients with concentrations of immunoglobulin A against tissue transglutaminase (IgA-TTG) more than 10-fold the upper limit of normal (ULN) and if further criteria are met. A retrospective study concluded that measurements of IgA-TTG and total IgA, or IgA-TTG and IgG against deamidated gliadin (IgG-DGL) could identify patients with and without celiac disease. Patients were assigned to categories of no celiac disease, celiac disease, or biopsy required, based entirely on antibody assays. We aimed to validate the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of these diagnostic procedures. Methods We performed a prospective study of 898 children undergoing duodenal biopsy analysis to confirm or rule out celiac disease at 13 centers in Europe. We compared findings from serologic analysis with findings from biopsy analyses, follow-up data, and diagnoses made by the pediatric gastroenterologists (celiac disease, no celiac disease, or no final diagnosis). Assays to measure IgA-TTG, IgG-DGL, and endomysium antibodies were performed by blinded researchers, and tissue sections were analyzed by local and blinded reference pathologists. We validated 2 procedures for diagnosis: total-IgA and IgA-TTG (the TTG-IgA procedure), as well as IgG-DGL with IgA-TTG (TTG-DGL procedure). Patients were assigned to categories of no celiac disease if all assays found antibody concentrations below 1-fold the ULN, or celiac disease if at least 1 assay measured antibody concentrations above 10-fold the ULN. All other cases were considered to require biopsy analysis. ULN values were calculated using the cut-off levels suggested by the test kit manufacturers. HLA-typing was performed for 449 participants. We used models that considered how specificity values change with prevalence to extrapolate the PPV and NPV to populations with lower prevalence of celiac disease. Results Of the participants, 592 were found to have celiac disease, 345 were found not to have celiac disease, and 24 had no final diagnosis. The TTG-IgA procedure identified patients with celiac disease with a PPV of 0.988 and an NPV of 0.934; the TTG-DGL procedure identified patients with celiac disease with a PPV of 0.988 and an NPV of 0.958. Based on our extrapolation model, we estimated that the PPV and NPV would remain above 0.95 even at a disease prevalence as low as 4%. Tests for endomysium antibodies and HLA type did not increase the PPV of samples with levels of IgA-TTG 10-fold or more above the ULN. Notably, 4.2% of pathologists disagreed in their analyses of duodenal morphology—a rate comparable to the error rate for serologic assays. Conclusions In a prospective study, we validated the TTG-IgA procedure and the TTG-DGL procedure in identification of pediatric patients with or without celiac disease, without biopsy.