Literature DB >> 31559264

Diagnostic Accuracy of a Point-of-Care Test for Celiac Disease Antibody Screening among Infertile Patients.

Louise Grode1, Thomas Møller Jensen1, Tina Parkner2, Inge Errebo Agerholm3, Peter Humaidan4,5, Bodil Hammer Bech6, Cecilia Ramlau-Hansen6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening for celiac disease among infertile patients has been suggested. Several rapid point-of-care (POC) tests aimed at detecting celiac disease antibodies have been developed. It has been suggested that these POC tests can be implemented as a replacement for standard laboratory tests.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a POC test (Simtomax®) that detects celiac disease antibodies compared with standard laboratory tests when screening for celiac disease among patients referred for fertility treatment in 2 Danish fertility clinics.
METHODS: Serum samples were analyzed for IgA anti-tissue transglutaminase (TGA) as the reference standard test with a cutoff of ≥7 kU/L and by the index POC test based on IgA and IgG antibodies against deamidated gliadin peptides (DGP). In IgA deficiency, the reference standard test was IgG DGP with a cutoff of ≥7 kU/L. Participants answered a questionnaire on gluten intake, symptoms, and risk factors. Diagnostic confirmation was made by duodenal biopsies. IgA TGA/IgG DGP were used as the reference standard to calculate positive and negative predictive values.
RESULTS: A total of 622 men and women (51.6%) were enrolled during 2015. The reference standard IgA TGA/IgG DGP was positive in 7 participants (1.1% [95% CI 0.5-2.3]) and the POC test was positive in 84 participants (13.5% [95% CI 10.9-16.4]), 3 of whom also had positive reference standard tests. This yields a sensitivity of the index POC test of 42.9% (95% CI 9.9-81.6) and a specificity of 86.8% (95% CI 83.9-89.4). Positive and negative predictive values were 3.57% (95% CI 0.7-10.1) and 99.3% (95% CI 98.1-99.8).
CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of the POC test was low; however, the specificity was moderately good. The POC test had a high negative predictive value in this low prevalent population but missed 1 patient with biopsy-confirmed celiac disease. However, because of many false-positive tests, it cannot be recommended as replacement for standard laboratory tests but rather as a triage test to decide if the standard serology tests should be performed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Celiac disease; Early detection; Gluten intolerance; Rapid test; Screening

Year:  2019        PMID: 31559264      PMCID: PMC6751420          DOI: 10.1159/000501520

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Inflamm Intest Dis        ISSN: 2296-9365


  31 in total

Review 1.  The histopathology of coeliac disease: time for a standardized report scheme for pathologists.

Authors:  G Oberhuber; G Granditsch; H Vogelsang
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 2.566

2.  High prevalence rates of adult silent coeliac disease, as seen in Sweden, must be expected in Denmark.

Authors:  I Weile; E Grodzinsky; T Skogh; R Jordal; B Cavell; P A Krasilnikoff
Journal:  APMIS       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.205

Review 3.  Diagnostic testing for celiac disease among patients with abdominal symptoms: a systematic review.

Authors:  Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Petra Jellema; Chris J Mulder; C M Frank Kneepkens; Henriëtte E van der Horst
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Is coeliac disease screening in risk groups justified? A fourteen-year follow-up with special focus on compliance and quality of life.

Authors:  M Viljamaa; P Collin; H Huhtala; H Sievänen; M Mäki; K Kaukinen
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 8.171

5.  Serological testing for celiac disease in women undergoing assisted reproduction techniques.

Authors:  Gian Mario Tiboni; Maria Grazia de Vita; Raffaella Faricelli; Franca Giampietro; Marco Liberati
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2005-09-19       Impact factor: 6.918

6.  Mucosal recovery and mortality in adults with celiac disease after treatment with a gluten-free diet.

Authors:  Alberto Rubio-Tapia; Mussarat W Rahim; Jacalyn A See; Brian D Lahr; Tsung-Teh Wu; Joseph A Murray
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-02-09       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 7.  Celiac disease: an underappreciated issue in women’s health.

Authors:  Sveta Shah; Daniel Leffler
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2010-09

8.  Feasibility of a finger prick-based self-testing kit in first- and second-degree relatives of children with coeliac disease.

Authors:  Judith Pichler; Matthias Zilbauer; Franco Torrente; Robert Heuschkel; Alan Phillips; Camilla Salvestrini
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 9.  Coeliac disease: dissecting a complex inflammatory disorder.

Authors:  Ludvig M Sollid
Journal:  Nat Rev Immunol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 53.106

10.  The impact of maternal celiac disease on birthweight and preterm birth: a Danish population-based cohort study.

Authors:  A S Khashan; T B Henriksen; P B Mortensen; R McNamee; F P McCarthy; M G Pedersen; L C Kenny
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 6.918

View more
  1 in total

1.  The prevalence of celiac disease in women with infertility-A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ida Glimberg; Linnea Haggård; Benjamin Lebwohl; Peter H R Green; Jonas F Ludvigsson
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2021-03-22
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.