4.7 Article

No association between gluten sensitivity and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
Volume 264, Issue 4, Pages 694-700

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-017-8400-8

Keywords

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; Gluten; Epidemiology; Serology; Genome-wide association studies

Funding

  1. Netherlands ALS Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To examine evidence for a role of gluten sensitivity (GS) or celiac disease (CD) in ALS etiology, we included participants from a population-based case-control study in The Netherlands between January 2006 and December 2015. We compared levels and seroprevalence of IgA antibodies to tissue transglutaminase 6 (TG6) in 359 ALS patients and 359 controls, and to transglutaminase 2 (TG2) and endomysium (EMA) in 199 ALS patients and 199 controls. Questionnaire data on 1829 ALS patients and 3920 controls were examined for CD or gluten-free diets (GFD). Genetic correlation and HLA allele frequencies were analyzed using two genome-wide association studies: one on ALS (12,577 cases, 23,475 controls), and one on CD (4533 cases, 10,750 controls). We found one patient with TG6, TG2 and EMA antibodies who had typical ALS and no symptoms of GS. TG6 antibody concentrations and positivity, CD prevalence and adherence to a GFD were similar in patients and controls (p > 0.66) and in these patients disease progression was compatible with typical ALS. CD and ALS were not found to be genetically correlated (p > 0.37). CD-associated HLA allele frequencies were similar in patients and controls (p > 0.28). In conclusion, we found no serological evidence for involvement of gluten-related antibodies in ALS etiology nor did we observe an association between CD and ALS in medical history or genetic data, indicating that there is no evidence in our data for an association between the two diseases. Hence, a role for a GFD in the ALS treatment seems unlikely.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available