MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808784475 · doi:10.2337/db18-1579-p

Diagnostic Accuracy of Serologic Screening Tests for Celiac Disease in Asymptomatic Adults and Children with Type 1 Diabetes

2018· article· en· W2808784475 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle Gould, Farid H. Mahmud, Antoine Clarke, Esther Assor, Amish Parikh, Andrew Advani, Bruce A. Perkins, Baiju R. Shah, Caroline Zuijdwijk, Charlotte McDonald, David R. Mack, Dror Koltin, Eugene Hsieh, Eva Szentgyörgyi, Fred Saibil, Geetha Mukerji, Heather Lochnan, Jeremy Gilbert, Kevin Bax, Margaret L. Lawson, Melanie Beaton, Nav Saloojee, Olivia Lou, Patricia Gallego, Robyn L. Houlden, Ronnie Aronson, Susan Kirsch, William G. Paterson, Zubin Punthakee, Margaret Marcon

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsymptomaticMedicineGastroenterologyType 1 diabetesInternal medicineSerologyTissue transglutaminaseDiabetes mellitusReceiver operating characteristicDiseaseImmunologyAntibodyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: As related autoimmune conditions, celiac disease (CD) is more common in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and is frequently asymptomatic. Despite this association, evidence as to the diagnostic accuracy of screening as well as the potential benefits or harms of screening for CD is limited in asymptomatic patients with T1D. Methods: T1D patients, aged 8-45 years, were serologically screened for CD at multiple centers across Ontario, Canada as part of the Celiac Disease and Diabetes Dietary Intervention and Evaluation Trial (CD-DIET). Patients were deemed asymptomatic on the basis of the absence of GI symptoms, weight changes, anemia and other CD-related clinical features. Screening was conducted in 2,386 patients using chemiluminescent (CL, BioFlash™) and/or ELISA (Celikey™) tissue transglutaminase (TTG) IgA assays, yielding 140 positives. Of these, 104 patients had a duodenal biopsy with CD confirmation (Marsh ≥2). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted and positive predictive values (PPV) of available screening tests for CD were evaluated. Results: CL and ELISA data were available for 100/104 and 36/104 patients, respectively. The area under the curve of the ROC for CL TTG was 0.918, while the PPV using the manufacturer referenced upper limit (RUL) of 30 CU was 85.9% (95% CI: 82.3-90.8%). According to our data, an optimal cut-off of 156.5 CU, or 5.2 times the RUL, showed an improved PPV of 95.8% (95% CI: 92.4-100.0%). With respect to ELISA TTG, the PPV was 94.4% at the RUL of 8 U/ml and reached to 100% at the optimal cut-off determined by our analysis of 58.7 U/ml, which translates to 7.3 times the RUL. Conclusion: Results from serologic CL and ELISA TTG assays that were greater than 5 times the reported upper limit showed a high PPV for biopsy-confirmed CD in asymptomatic adult and pediatric T1D patients, which may help guide diagnostic evaluation in this population. Disclosure M. Gould: None. F.H. Mahmud: None. A.B. Clarke: None. E. Assor: None. A. Parikh: None. A. Advani: Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. Other Relationship; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. B.A. Perkins: Advisory Panel; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. Research Support; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Novo Nordisk Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk Inc., Abbott. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Abbott, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Insulet Corporation. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Insulet Corporation, Dexcom, Inc.. B.R. Shah: None. C.S. Zuijdwijk: None. C. McDonald: None. D. Mack: None. D. Koltin: None. E. Hsieh: None. E.M. Szentgyorgyi: None. F. Saibil: None. G. Mukerji: None. H.A. Lochnan: Research Support; Self; Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Boston Therapeutics, Inc., Sanofi. J. Gilbert: Other Relationship; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi. K. Bax: None. M.L. Lawson: None. M.D. Beaton: Advisory Panel; Self; Takeda Canada Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AbbVie Inc.. N.A. Saloojee: None. O. Lou: None. P.H. Gallego: None. R.L. Houlden: Research Support; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company. R. Aronson: Other Relationship; Self; Novo Nordisk Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, AstraZeneca. Research Support; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Merck & Co., Inc., Senseonics, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. S.E. Kirsch: None. W.G. Paterson: None. Z. Punthakee: Research Support; Self; Amgen, Astra Zeneca/Bristol Myers Squibb, Lexicon, Merck, NovoNordisk, Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Abbott, Astra Zeneca/Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi. Advisory Panel; Self; Astra Zeneca/Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Dexcom, Janssen, Medtronic, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi. M.A. Marcon: None.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207