Interpretation of serological tests in the diagnosis of celiac disease: Anti-deamidated gliadin peptide antibodies revisited

Abstract

Algorithms for celiac disease diagnosis provided by guidelines are based primarily on anti-tissue transglutaminase 2 (TG2) antibodies and/or anti-endomysium antibodies. The place of anti-deamidated gliadin peptide (DGP) antibodies is less well established. This study was designed to assess the clinical relevance of anti-DGP antibodies. Two thousand and twenty-six consecutive unselected patients systematically tested for anti-TG2, endomysium, gliadin, DGP antibodies and IgA dosage were investigated. The serological interpretation was assessed by analyzing the medical records of patients. From the 1984 newly investigated patients suspected of celiac disease, 10% had at least one celiac marker. Anti-TG2, anti-endomysium, anti-gliadin and anti-DGP antibodies were found in 1.1%, 0.6%, 6.8% and 4.1% of cases respectively, with different combinations. The diagnosis of celiac disease was retained in 0.45% of patients. When using the duodenal biopsies as a gold standard, analysis of the anti-DGP diagnosis performance showed that the specificity and the predictive positive value (PPV) were lower than that of the anti-TG2 assay. The combined detection of anti-TG2 and anti-DGP antibodies had a lower PPV than that of anti-TG2 and anti-endomysium antibodies (p = 0.04). When analyzing the contribution of anti-DGP antibodies as an additional marker to both anti-TG2 and anti-endomysium antibodies, the PPV of the three associated antibodies was shown to be significantly lower than the PPV of the both anti-TG2 and anti-endomysium antibodies (p = 0.04). As a conclusion, anti-DGP antibodies may not have the diagnosis value required as an additional screening test to anti-TG2 antibodies for identifying celiac disease patients in medical centers where anti-endomysium detection is available.

• Deamidated gliadin peptides
• anti-tissue transglutaminase antibodies
• anti-endomysium antibodies
• autoantibodies
• duodenal biopsies

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the staff of the Laboratory of Immunology, Reims University Hospitals, for their technical assistance.

Declaration of interest

The authors certify that they have no affiliation with or financial involvement in any organization or entity with a direct financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript (e.g. employment, consultancies, board membership and honoraria).