4.8 Article

Kinetics of the histological, serological and symptomatic responses to gluten challenge in adults with coeliac disease

期刊

GUT
卷 62, 期 7, 页码 996-1004

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302196

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Health, National Center for Research Resources [UL1 RR025758]
  2. National Institute of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [K23 DK082619]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective Coeliac disease is defined by gluten responsiveness, yet there are few data on gluten challenge (GC) in adults on a gluten-free diet. Lack of data regarding the kinetics of responses to gluten is a limitation in clinical practice and research when GC is performed. Design 20 adults with biopsy-proven coeliac disease participated. The study included two run-in visits followed by a 14-day GC at a randomly assigned dose of 3 or 7.5 g of gluten/day. Study visits occurred 3, 7, 14 and 28 days after starting GC. Duodenal biopsy was performed during the run-in and at days 3 and 14 of GC. Villous height to crypt depth ratio (Vh:Cd) and intraepithelial lymphocyte (IEL) count/100 enterocytes were measured by two pathologists. Antibodies to tissue transglutaminase and deamidated gliadin peptides, lactulose to mannitol ratio (LAMA) and symptoms were assessed at each visit. Results Significant reduction in Vh: Cd (2.2-1.1, p<0.001) and increase in IELs (32.6-51.8, p<0.001) were seen from baseline to day 14. Antibody titres increased slightly from baseline to day 14 of GC but markedly by day 28. LAMA did not change significantly. Gastrointestinal symptoms increased significantly by day 3 and returned to baseline by day 28. No differences were seen between the two gluten doses. Conclusions 14 day GC at >= 3 g of gluten/day induces histological and serological changes in the majority of adults with coeliac disease. These data permit accurate design of clinical trials and indicate that many individuals will meet coeliac diagnostic criteria after a 2-week GC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据