A19 INVESTIGATING MECHANISMS THAT DRIVE SYMPTOMS IN IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME PATIENTS WITH PERCEIVED GLUTEN SENSITIVITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) often report gastrointestinal symptoms after consuming wheat and gluten-containing foods. It is, however, unclear whether gluten is the main driver of symptoms, as other immunogenic peptides, such as amylase trypsin inhibitors (ATI), poorly digestible fiber (inulin, part of FODMAP) or even the nocebo effect may contribute to symptom generation. Purpose To evaluate whether whole wheat containing ATIs and/or purified gluten trigger gastrointestinal symptoms compared to nocebo in patients with IBS adopting a gluten-free diet (GFD). Method We conducted a double-blind, randomized, nocebo-controlled crossover study in adult IBS patients (Rome IV criteria) who previously perceived improvement of symptoms while on a GFD. The study was approved by the Hamilton Research Ethics Board (HiREB #4367). Participants were challenged for 7 days with whole wheat, purified gluten, and nocebo (gluten-free flour) added to low FODMAP cereal bars. Each challenge was followed by a 2-week washout. Patients remained on a GFD throughout the study, diet adherence was assessed by a dietitian and stool gluten immunogenic peptides (GIP; Biomedal). Gastrointestinal symptoms were assessed by IBS Symptom Severity Score (IBS-SSS); increases >50 points were considered a significant worsening. Blood samples were collected to assess immune markers and celiac (HLA DQ2, DQ8 and DQ7) genotype. Statistical comparisons used Friedman rank sum tests and paired Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Result(s) Twenty-nine IBS patients (27 female, mean age=42, SD=14.4 years) were enrolled in the study; 1 dropped. Similar proportions of patients reacted symptomatically to wheat (11/28, 39.3%), gluten (10/28, 35.7%) and nocebo (8/28, 28.6%). However, there was an overall significant increase in IBS symptoms after wheat (+39.5 on IBS-SSS; p=0.030) but not after gluten (+27.5; p=0.051) or nocebo (+5.5; p=0.236) challenges (Figure 1). Ten participants experienced IBS-SSS symptoms >175 during baseline and did not worsen further during the challenges. TNF-α trended from 1.35 pg/mL after nocebo, 1.47 pg/mL after gluten, to 1.57 pg/mL after wheat; however, this was not significant. Baseline adherence to a GFD was rated excellent in 19 (68%), good in 6 (21%), and fair in 3 (11%) participants. Median GIP levels were 0.584 µg/g after wheat, 0.432 µg/g after gluten, and 0.095 µg/g after nocebo; p<0.0001. Celiac predisposition genes were present in 19/24 participants (10/24 had DQ2, 2/24 had DQ8, and 9/24 had DQ7). Image Conclusion(s) IBS patients self-reporting wheat or gluten sensitivity had worse symptoms after whole wheat, but not purified gluten or nocebo challenge. However, similar proportions of IBS patients reacted to each intervention, suggesting that central mechanisms play an important role in symptom genesis. Furthermore, one third of patients had high symptoms during a GFD and did not react to wheat or gluten challenges, suggesting that other mechanisms are driving their IBS symptoms. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below CIHR, Other Please indicate your source of funding; Society for the Study of Celiac Disease (Nestle); Canadian Digestive Health Foundation Disclosure of Interest None Declared
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".