Exposure sources, amounts and time course of gluten ingestion and excretion in patients with coeliac disease on a gluten‐free diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A major deficit in understanding and improving treatment in coeliac disease (CD) is the lack of empiric data on real world gluten exposure. AIMS: To estimate gluten exposure on a gluten-free diet (GFD) using immunoassays for gluten immunogenic peptides (GIP) and to examine relationships among GIP detection, symptoms and suspected gluten exposures METHODS: Adults with biopsy-confirmed CD on a GFD for 24 months were recruited from a population-based inception cohort. Participants kept a diary and collected urine samples for 10 days and stools on days 4-10. 'Doggie bags' containing ¼ portions of foods consumed were saved during the first 7 days. Gluten in food, stool and urine was quantified using A1/G12 ELISA. RESULTS: Eighteen participants with CD (12 female; age 21-70 years) and three participants on a gluten-containing diet enrolled and completed the study. Twelve out of 18 CD participants had a median 2.1 mg gluten per exposure (range 0.2 to >80 mg). Most exposures were asymptomatic and unsuspected. There was high intra-individual variability in the interval between gluten ingestion and excretion. Participants were generally unable to identify the food. CONCLUSIONS: Gluten exposure on a GFD is common, intermittent, and usually silent. Excretion kinetics are highly variable among individuals. The amount of gluten varied widely, but was typically in the milligram range, which was 10-100 times less than consumed by those on an unrestricted diet. These findings suggest that a strict GFD is difficult to attain, and specific exposures are difficult to detect due to variable time course of excretion.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".