Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38257173›Full record

Trial reportNutrients2024

Stool Gluten Peptide Detection Is Superior to Urinary Analysis, Coeliac Serology, Dietary Adherence Scores and Symptoms in the Detection of Intermittent Gluten Exposure in Coeliac Disease: A Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Low-Dose Gluten Challenge Study.

Amy K Russell, Erin C Lucas, Lee M Henneken, Catherine J Pizzey, Dean Clarke, Anna Myleus, Jason A Tye-Din

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Evolution in coeliac disease diagnosis and management.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Amy K RussellImmunology Division, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9272-8872
Erin C LucasImmunology Division, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Lee M HennekenDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Catherine J PizzeyDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Dean ClarkeNational Measurement Institute, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia.
Anna MyleusDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Family Medicine, Umea University, 901 87 Umea, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2478-9598
Jason A Tye-DinImmunology Division, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7687-9654
The Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research · AUNational Measurement Institute · AUUmeå University · SE

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1176553
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monitoring adherence to a gluten-free diet is an important goal of coeliac disease management. Urine and stool gluten immunogenic peptide (GIP) assays provide an objective readout of gluten ingestion, with the former favoured due to its convenience and acceptability. This study assessed stool GIP excretion after low-dose gluten challenge designed to mimic accidental gluten exposure. A total of 52 coeliac participants undertook a randomised, double-blind gluten (50-1000 mg) or placebo challenge. Stool and urinary GIP, serology, dietary adherence and symptoms were assessed. Stool GIP was 100% sensitive for gluten intake ≥250 mg and 71% for 50 mg. Peak GIP detection was 12-36 h after gluten exposure. The mean stool GIP after 1000 mg gluten ingestion remained above the limit of quantification for 5 days. Urine GIP assessment had poor sensitivity for GIP excretion compared to stool. Serology, dietary adherence score and symptoms did not correlate with gluten excretion during lead-in. We conclude that stool GIP detection is highly sensitive, with levels related to gluten dose and time from ingestion. Weekly or bi-weekly testing will detect low-level exposure more effectively than urine GIP assessments or traditional methods. In this seronegative, apparently well-treated cohort, a high frequency of baseline-positive GIP suggests ongoing gluten exposure, but the assessment of patient behaviour and assay specificity is needed.

Indexed as

Celiac DiseaseGlutensDiet, Gluten-FreeFecesHumansPeptidesGlutensPeptidescoeliac diseasegluten excretion stoolgluten-free diet monitoringgluten immunogenic peptides

Identifiers

PMID38257173
PMCPMC10818827
OpenAlexW4390954786

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.