BACKGROUND: Negative predictive value (NPV) of celiac disease (CD)-related human leukocyte antigens (HLA) DQ2 and DQ8 approaches 100 % in individual patients. However, studies evaluating its exclusionary utility in patient groups are lacking. AIM: We aim to assess the performance of HLA testing when applied to patient groups with varying characteristics and propose evidence-based recommendations for its clinical use. METHODS: Demographic and clinical information was recorded in patients undergoing HLA testing. Using predetermined criteria, patients were classified as CD, non-CD, or indeterminate. Diagnostic yield of HLA testing was defined as the percentage of patients in whom CD could be excluded based on negative HLA test. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-six patients underwent testing for CD-related HLA DQ2 and DQ8. 102 (100 non-CD, 2 CD) patients tested HLA negative for a 98 % NPV and 39 % diagnostic yield. Diagnostic yield was highest (60 %) in patients with intraepithelial lymphocytosis plus normal IgA tissue transglutaminase antibody (IgA-tTG) and lowest in patients with positive IgA-tTG plus villous atrophy (0 %). CD was diagnosed in two HLA-negative patients, who carried half of DQ2.5 trans genotype. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic yield of CD-related HLA testing varies widely depending on clinical indication. HLA testing is a practical and valuable test for most patients in whom initial evaluation for CD is inconclusive. A negative HLA result usually obviates the need for further celiac testing including endoscopy and gluten challenge. Rarely, in patients reported as HLA negative, half of HLA DQ2.5 (cis or trans) is sufficient for development of CD.
BACKGROUND: Negative predictive value (NPV) of celiac disease (CD)-related human leukocyte antigens (HLA) DQ2 and DQ8 approaches 100 % in individual patients. However, studies evaluating its exclusionary utility in patient groups are lacking. AIM: We aim to assess the performance of HLA testing when applied to patient groups with varying characteristics and propose evidence-based recommendations for its clinical use. METHODS: Demographic and clinical information was recorded in patients undergoing HLA testing. Using predetermined criteria, patients were classified as CD, non-CD, or indeterminate. Diagnostic yield of HLA testing was defined as the percentage of patients in whom CD could be excluded based on negative HLA test. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-six patients underwent testing for CD-related HLA DQ2 and DQ8. 102 (100 non-CD, 2 CD) patients tested HLA negative for a 98 % NPV and 39 % diagnostic yield. Diagnostic yield was highest (60 %) in patients with intraepithelial lymphocytosis plus normal IgAtissue transglutaminase antibody (IgA-tTG) and lowest in patients with positive IgA-tTG plus villous atrophy (0 %). CD was diagnosed in two HLA-negative patients, who carried half of DQ2.5 trans genotype. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic yield of CD-related HLA testing varies widely depending on clinical indication. HLA testing is a practical and valuable test for most patients in whom initial evaluation for CD is inconclusive. A negative HLA result usually obviates the need for further celiac testing including endoscopy and gluten challenge. Rarely, in patients reported as HLA negative, half of HLA DQ2.5 (cis or trans) is sufficient for development of CD.
Authors: S Pellegrino; V Villanacci; N Sansotta; R Scarfì; G Bassotti; G Vieni; A Princiotta; C Sferlazzas; G Magazzù; G Tuccari Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2011-01-23 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: F Biagi; P I Bianchi; J Campanella; C Badulli; M Martinetti; C Klersy; C Alvisi; O Luinetti; G R Corazza Journal: J Clin Pathol Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Jihane Romanos; Cleo C van Diemen; Ilja M Nolte; Gosia Trynka; Alexandra Zhernakova; Jingyuan Fu; Maria Teresa Bardella; Donatella Barisani; Ross McManus; David A van Heel; Cisca Wijmenga Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2009-05-18 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Francesca Megiorni; Barbara Mora; Margherita Bonamico; Maria Barbato; Monica Montuori; Franca Viola; Simonetta Trabace; Maria C Mazzilli Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2008-01-02 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Muhammed Hadithi; B Mary E von Blomberg; J Bart A Crusius; Elisabeth Bloemena; Pieter J Kostense; Jos W R Meijer; Chris J J Mulder; Coen D A Stehouwer; Amado S Peña Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Markku Mäki; Kirsi Mustalahti; Jorma Kokkonen; Petri Kulmala; Mila Haapalahti; Tuomo Karttunen; Jorma Ilonen; Kaija Laurila; Ingrid Dahlbom; Tony Hansson; Peter Höpfl; Mikael Knip Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Daniel C Adelman; Joseph Murray; Tsung-Teh Wu; Markku Mäki; Peter H Green; Ciarán P Kelly Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Govind K Makharia; Prashant Singh; Carlo Catassi; David S Sanders; Daniel Leffler; Raja Affendi Raja Ali; Julio C Bai Journal: Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 46.802
Authors: Isabel A Hujoel; Claire L Jansson-Knodell; Philippe P Hujoel; Margaux L A Hujoel; Rok Seon Choung; Joseph A Murray; Alberto Rubio-Tapia Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 3.174