• Join our community!

    Do you have questions about celiac disease or the gluten-free diet?

  • Ads by Google:
     




    Get email alerts Subscribe to Celiac.com's FREE weekly eNewsletter

    Ads by Google:



       Get email alertsSubscribe to Celiac.com's FREE weekly eNewsletter

  • Member Statistics

    77,369
    Total Members
    3,093
    Most Online
    Tesy
    Newest Member
    Tesy
    Joined
  • 0

    Significance of Screening Detected Celiac Disease in Children with Type I Diabetes (A Case Control Study)


    Dr. Murali Jatla


    Ads by Google:




    ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ADS
    Ads by Google:



    Celiac.com 11/06/2007 - This study investigated the effect of screening detected celiac disease in type I diabetic children in a multi-center case-control fashion.  The research team consisted of B Rami, Z Sumni, E Schober et al from Austria, Czech Republic, and Slovenia, among other European countries.

    The team compared 98 diabetics with silent celiac disease to 196 control diabetics without celiac matched for age, sex, diabetes duration.  Mean age at diabetes diagnosis was 6.5 yrs, celiac diagnosis was 10.0 yrs.  Celiac screening included yearly antibody testing and positive patients underwent biopsy.  Hemoglobin A1c, hypoglycemia, ketoacidosis, insulin dosage, body-mass index, and height did not differ between cases and controls at celiac diagnosis or after a mean follow-up of 3.3 years.  After diagnosis of celiac disease, weight gain was diminished in boys with celiac disease compared to their controls.

    Although a clear link between type I diabetes and increased risk of celiac disease is established, the benefit of a gluten-free diet is unclear in these children.  This study followed 98 patients with diabetes and silent celiac for a mean of 3.3 years and compared them to 196 controls.  This is the largest, best designed case-control study to date and it did not demonstrate any significant differences between the two groups, except for a decreased Body Mass Index (BMI - though still greater than non-diabetic, control children) in males after diagnosis. 

    What is more intriguing is that at diagnosis, no significant differences in height, BMI, HbA1c, insulin need, or hypoglycemia events were seen, questioning the metabolic significance of silent celiac disease.  In this study, it is difficult to estimate the duration of silent celiac disease prior to diagnosis.  Although, given the fact that these patients were asymptomatic and their mean diabetes duration was 3.6 years, it likely implies that silent celiac disease was present for a few years.

    The data regarding the benefit of a gluten-free diet in screening detected celiac disease in type I diabetic children is scant but is slowly increasing.  Numerous psychological (burden of gluten free diet in addition to diabetic diet), cost (of diet), and ethical issues (potential long-term benefits of gluten-free diet, compliance with diet) exist regarding these children and hopefully this question will be answered soon and with good, convincing data. 

    Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, 41:317-321, 2005

    0


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I have a biochemistry degree and have worked with pharmaceutical research and the wording of this article made it difficult for me to follow how these children were diagnosed, if they were on a gluten-free diet, and if they had celiac disease before or after their diabetes diagnosis.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest Colleen Karney

    Posted

    I guess he's saying that, absent free health care assistance for celiac children, the medical community is reluctant to offer celiac screening to all children. A broad-based celiac disease screening program, he suggests, would raise psychological, cost, and ethical issues. On the other hand, leaving celiac children undiagnosed also raises psychological issues (celiac disease contributes to depression and other mental health effects), cost issues (greater expense associated with a decade or more of wrong medical treatments and possible hospitalization for celiac disease patients who are not diagnosed until their teenage or adult years), and ethical issues (is it ethical to tell undiagnosed celiac disease patients that their poor concentration is their own fault; that they just need to 'pull out' of their depression; that they need to eat more whole grains, like wheat, oats, and barley, to ease their constipation; that there is no known cause for their IBS, skin, or hair problems; or that their 'gas' problems are triggered by unidentifiable 'wrong' foods?). If the medical community is waiting until families can have a special celiac disease assistant available to help them find and cook gluten-free food, navigate the school cafeteria and restaurants, and obtain financial assistance, then the medical community should lobby for whatever help is needed to help doctors feel comfortable in telling families how to keep their children healthy. For celiac disease families, good health is not possible without the early screening that US doctors are so reluctant to provide.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest Murali Jatla

    Posted

    Thanks for the the above comments. As stated in the summary the celiac disease was diagnosed 3.5 years after diabetes. Celiac screening was performed yearly after diabetes diagnosis and all celiacs were recommended a gluten-free diet. The article has been modified to reflect these clarifications.

     

    The trouble with silent celiac disease in diabetes does not lie in screening. Screening is recommended for all type 1 diabetic children--it is recommended by major pediatric societies and must be performed. Making a diagnosis is not difficult, from a pediatric gastroenterologist's perspective. The true challenge lies in appropriately counseling an asymptomatic diabetic child's family when they are diagnosed with silent celiac disease. It is challenging to adjust to another condition that requires further dietary modification. The benefits of treating silent celiac disease in type 1 diabetic children is unknown and this largest, best-performed study found no significant improvements. Perhaps a follow-up period longer than 3.3 years is required to see any true effects.

     

    A separate, perhaps more important, question is whether type I diabetes was secondary to silent celiac disease and whether it may have been prevented by celiac screening at an earlier age. It is unethical to perform a trial where we test a group of children at infancy and randomize them to regular diet or gluten-free diet and look 15 years later to see how many develop diabetes in the two groups. The question of universal screening is a very important one that will hopefully be settled soon. However, there should be no question regarding screening for celiac disease in type I diabetes, although the data supporting treatment is in evolution.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest Scott Adams

    Posted

    Thank you for the clarifications Dr. Jatla!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Popular Contributors

  • Ads by Google:

  • Who's Online   6 Members, 0 Anonymous, 995 Guests (See full list)

  • Related Articles

    Scott Adams
    Diabetes Care 2002;25:1111-1122.
    Celiac.com 08/08/2002 - A recent study conducted by Dr. David B. Dunger (Addenbrookes Hospital in Cambridge) and colleagues found that children with type 1 diabetes and latent celiac disease who were put on a gluten-free diet showed significant improvement in their metabolic control and growth. The study, which was published in the July issue of Diabetes Care, looked at 11 children with type 1 diabetes and who were diagnosed with celiac disease using anti-gliadin and anti-endomysial antibodies and a biopsy for confirmation.
    The group with celiac disease had a significantly lower mean BMI standard deviation score (SDS) than that of a control group of 22 age and sex-matched children with diabetes who did not have celiac disease. The mean height SDS and C-peptide levels in the two groups were similar, while the mean HbA-1-c was lower (better) in the group with celiac disease. After one year on a gluten-free diet the group with celiac disease improved its mean BMI score to that of the control group, and its HbA-1-c score went down (improved), while the control groups HbA-1-c score increased (worsened).
    The researchers conclude that more studies are needed to support their findings that a gluten-free diet significantly improves glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes and celiac disease.

    Scott Adams
    Arch Dis Child 2004;89:871-876. Celiac.com 07/12/2005 – Australian researchers have determined that a gluten-free diet in children with Type 1 diabetes mellitus and celiac disease can improve both growth and diabetes control. In the study 21 children (mean age 7.5 years) with both conditions went on a gluten-free diet for 12 months, and their growth and insulin dosages were carefully measured and compared with that of two matched diabetic, non-celiac controls. The group on a gluten-free diet showed significant increases in weight and body mass index compared with the control group, although an increase in height found in the study was not found to be significant. At the time of diagnosis insulin dosages for the celiac disease group were less than that of the control group, but became similar to the controls once a gluten-free diet was started—although the increase in insulin dosage had no effect on HbA1c levels.
    The researchers conclude: “Identification and dietary treatment of celiac disease in children with diabetes improved growth and influenced diabetic control. Evaluation of the outcome of treatment of celiac disease in diabetics should include assessments of gluten intake.” Obviously all children (and everyone) with celiac disease should be on a gluten-free diet, but what is noteworthy about this study is that a connection was found between insulin levels, diabetes control, and the gluten-free diet.

    Scott Adams
    Celiac.com 11/07/2006 – In the first multi-country population based study of its kind, Danish researchers have found that around 1 in 8 children with Type 1 diabetes also have celiac disease, and of these the prevalence of stunted growth is abnormally high. Dr. Dorte Hansen and colleages from Odense University Hospital screened 269 children with type 1 diabetes for celiac disease using immunoglobulin A anti-endomysium antibody, anti-tissue transglutaminase antibody, and intestinal biopsy. The researchers found 33 cases of celiac disease, and in 5 of these cases the children had no symptoms of the disease whatsoever. The children with celiac disease were diagnosed with diabetes at a significantly youger age than their non-celiac counterparts and each was also significantly shorter and lighter.
    The 33 celiac disease patients were put on a strict gluten-free diet for 2 years, and amond the 24 who complied with the diet all symptoms resolved. Additionally most of the children gained weight and the children who were under 14 also regained their height.
    A gluten-free diet relieved symptoms of celiac disease and restored normal growth patterns to most of the children. The doctors conclude that regular screening for celiac disease should be conducted in all children with type 1 diabetes.
    Diabetes Care 2006;29:2452-2456.

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 09/19/2012 - Researchers have documented rising rates of celiac disease in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). A research team recently tried to assess the effect of celiac disease on growth and glycemic control in patients with T1D, and to determine the effects of a gluten-free diet on these parameters.
    The research team included I. Taler, M. Phillip, Y. Lebenthal, L. de Vries, R. Shamir, and S. Shalitin. They are affiliated with the Department of Pediatrics B, Schneider Children's Medical Center of Israel in Petach Tikva, Israel.
    To do so, they conducted a longitudinal retrospective case-control study, in which they reviewed the medical data on 68 patients with T1D and duodenal-biopsy-confirmed celiac disease. They looked at weight, height, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), frequency of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), and severe hypoglycemic events before and after diagnosis and treatment of celiac disease.
    They then compared their findings with 131 patients with T1D alone, who were all matched for age, gender, and duration of diabetes.
    In all, 5.5% patients with T1D who attended the center during the study period were diagnosed with celiac disease, while 26% of the patients with celiac disease were symptomatic.
    The data showed no significant differences in glycemic control or frequency of severe hypoglycemia or DKA events between the study group and control subjects.
    Body mass index-standard deviation score (SDS), height-SDS, and HbA1c values were insignificantly higher in the control group than in the study group, and similar in celiac disease patients with good or fair/poor adherence to a gluten-free diet during follow-up.
    Patients with T1D and celiac disease and following a gluten-free diet have growth and metabolic control similar to those with T1D with no celiac disease.
    To determine whether a gluten-free diet is appropriate for asymptomatic celiac patients or only symptomatic patients must be assessed against possible short- and long-term consequences of no intervention, and the decision should be based on more evidence from larger randomized studies.
    Source:
    Pediatr Diabetes. 2012 May 7. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-5448.2012.00878.x.

  • Recent Articles

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 06/18/2018 - Celiac disease has been mainly associated with Caucasian populations in Northern Europe, and their descendants in other countries, but new scientific evidence is beginning to challenge that view. Still, the exact global prevalence of celiac disease remains unknown.  To get better data on that issue, a team of researchers recently conducted a comprehensive review and meta-analysis to get a reasonably accurate estimate the global prevalence of celiac disease. 
    The research team included P Singh, A Arora, TA Strand, DA Leffler, C Catassi, PH Green, CP Kelly, V Ahuja, and GK Makharia. They are variously affiliated with the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Lady Hardinge Medical College, New Delhi, India; Innlandet Hospital Trust, Lillehammer, Norway; Centre for International Health, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Gastroenterology Research and Development, Takeda Pharmaceuticals Inc, Cambridge, MA; Department of Pediatrics, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy; Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York; USA Celiac Disease Center, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York; and the Department of Gastroenterology and Human Nutrition, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
    For their review, the team searched Medline, PubMed, and EMBASE for the keywords ‘celiac disease,’ ‘celiac,’ ‘tissue transglutaminase antibody,’ ‘anti-endomysium antibody,’ ‘endomysial antibody,’ and ‘prevalence’ for studies published from January 1991 through March 2016. 
    The team cross-referenced each article with the words ‘Asia,’ ‘Europe,’ ‘Africa,’ ‘South America,’ ‘North America,’ and ‘Australia.’ They defined celiac diagnosis based on European Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition guidelines. The team used 96 articles of 3,843 articles in their final analysis.
    Overall global prevalence of celiac disease was 1.4% in 275,818 individuals, based on positive blood tests for anti-tissue transglutaminase and/or anti-endomysial antibodies. The pooled global prevalence of biopsy-confirmed celiac disease was 0.7% in 138,792 individuals. That means that numerous people with celiac disease potentially remain undiagnosed.
    Rates of celiac disease were 0.4% in South America, 0.5% in Africa and North America, 0.6% in Asia, and 0.8% in Europe and Oceania; the prevalence was 0.6% in female vs 0.4% males. Celiac disease was significantly more common in children than adults.
    This systematic review and meta-analysis showed celiac disease to be reported worldwide. Blood test data shows celiac disease rate of 1.4%, while biopsy data shows 0.7%. The prevalence of celiac disease varies with sex, age, and location. 
    This review demonstrates a need for more comprehensive population-based studies of celiac disease in numerous countries.  The 1.4% rate indicates that there are 91.2 million people worldwide with celiac disease, and 3.9 million are in the U.S.A.
    Source:
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Jun;16(6):823-836.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.06.037.

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 06/16/2018 - Summer is the time for chips and salsa. This fresh salsa recipe relies on cabbage, yes, cabbage, as a secret ingredient. The cabbage brings a delicious flavor and helps the salsa hold together nicely for scooping with your favorite chips. The result is a fresh, tasty salsa that goes great with guacamole.
    Ingredients:
    3 cups ripe fresh tomatoes, diced 1 cup shredded green cabbage ½ cup diced yellow onion ¼ cup chopped fresh cilantro 1 jalapeno, seeded 1 Serrano pepper, seeded 2 tablespoons lemon juice 2 tablespoons red wine vinegar 2 garlic cloves, minced salt to taste black pepper, to taste Directions:
    Purée all ingredients together in a blender.
    Cover and refrigerate for at least 1 hour. 
    Adjust seasoning with salt and pepper, as desired. 
    Serve is a bowl with tortilla chips and guacamole.

    Dr. Ron Hoggan, Ed.D.
    Celiac.com 06/15/2018 - There seems to be widespread agreement in the published medical research reports that stuttering is driven by abnormalities in the brain. Sometimes these are the result of brain injuries resulting from a stroke. Other types of brain injuries can also result in stuttering. Patients with Parkinson’s disease who were treated with stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus, an area of the brain that regulates some motor functions, experienced a return or worsening of stuttering that improved when the stimulation was turned off (1). Similarly, stroke has also been reported in association with acquired stuttering (2). While there are some reports of psychological mechanisms underlying stuttering, a majority of reports seem to favor altered brain morphology and/or function as the root of stuttering (3). Reports of structural differences between the brain hemispheres that are absent in those who do not stutter are also common (4). About 5% of children stutter, beginning sometime around age 3, during the phase of speech acquisition. However, about 75% of these cases resolve without intervention, before reaching their teens (5). Some cases of aphasia, a loss of speech production or understanding, have been reported in association with damage or changes to one or more of the language centers of the brain (6). Stuttering may sometimes arise from changes or damage to these same language centers (7). Thus, many stutterers have abnormalities in the same regions of the brain similar to those seen in aphasia.
    So how, you may ask, is all this related to gluten? As a starting point, one report from the medical literature identifies a patient who developed aphasia after admission for severe diarrhea. By the time celiac disease was diagnosed, he had completely lost his faculty of speech. However, his speech and normal bowel function gradually returned after beginning a gluten free diet (8). This finding was so controversial at the time of publication (1988) that the authors chose to remain anonymous. Nonetheless, it is a valuable clue that suggests gluten as a factor in compromised speech production. At about the same time (late 1980’s) reports of connections between untreated celiac disease and seizures/epilepsy were emerging in the medical literature (9).
    With the advent of the Internet a whole new field of anecdotal information was emerging, connecting a variety of neurological symptoms to celiac disease. While many medical practitioners and researchers were casting aspersions on these assertions, a select few chose to explore such claims using scientific research designs and methods. While connections between stuttering and gluten consumption seem to have been overlooked by the medical research community, there is a rich literature on the Internet that cries out for more structured investigation of this connection. Conversely, perhaps a publication bias of the peer review process excludes work that explores this connection.
    Whatever the reason that stuttering has not been reported in the medical literature in association with gluten ingestion, a number of personal disclosures and comments suggesting a connection between gluten and stuttering can be found on the Internet. Abid Hussain, in an article about food allergy and stuttering said: “The most common food allergy prevalent in stutterers is that of gluten which has been found to aggravate the stutter” (10). Similarly, Craig Forsythe posted an article that includes five cases of self-reporting individuals who believe that their stuttering is or was connected to gluten, one of whom also experiences stuttering from foods containing yeast (11). The same site contains one report of a stutterer who has had no relief despite following a gluten free diet for 20 years (11). Another stutterer, Jay88, reports the complete disappearance of her/his stammer on a gluten free diet (12). Doubtless there are many more such anecdotes to be found on the Internet* but we have to question them, exercising more skepticism than we might when reading similar claims in a peer reviewed scientific or medical journal.
    There are many reports in such journals connecting brain and neurological ailments with gluten, so it is not much of a stretch, on that basis alone, to suspect that stuttering may be a symptom of the gluten syndrome. Rodney Ford has even characterized celiac disease as an ailment that may begin through gluten-induced neurological damage (13) and Marios Hadjivassiliou and his group of neurologists and neurological investigators have devoted considerable time and effort to research that reveals gluten as an important factor in a majority of neurological diseases of unknown origin (14) which, as I have pointed out previously, includes most neurological ailments.
    My own experience with stuttering is limited. I stuttered as a child when I became nervous, upset, or self-conscious. Although I have been gluten free for many years, I haven’t noticed any impact on my inclination to stutter when upset. I don’t know if they are related, but I have also had challenges with speaking when distressed and I have noticed a substantial improvement in this area since removing gluten from my diet. Nonetheless, I have long wondered if there is a connection between gluten consumption and stuttering. Having done the research for this article, I would now encourage stutterers to try a gluten free diet for six months to see if it will reduce or eliminate their stutter. Meanwhile, I hope that some investigator out there will research this matter, publish her findings, and start the ball rolling toward getting some definitive answers to this question.
    Sources:
    1. Toft M, Dietrichs E. Aggravated stuttering following subthalamic deep brain stimulation in Parkinson’s disease--two cases. BMC Neurol. 2011 Apr 8;11:44.
    2. Tani T, Sakai Y. Stuttering after right cerebellar infarction: a case study. J Fluency Disord. 2010 Jun;35(2):141-5. Epub 2010 Mar 15.
    3. Lundgren K, Helm-Estabrooks N, Klein R. Stuttering Following Acquired Brain Damage: A Review of the Literature. J Neurolinguistics. 2010 Sep 1;23(5):447-454.
    4. Jäncke L, Hänggi J, Steinmetz H. Morphological brain differences between adult stutterers and non-stutterers. BMC Neurol. 2004 Dec 10;4(1):23.
    5. Kell CA, Neumann K, von Kriegstein K, Posenenske C, von Gudenberg AW, Euler H, Giraud AL. How the brain repairs stuttering. Brain. 2009 Oct;132(Pt 10):2747-60. Epub 2009 Aug 26.
    6. Galantucci S, Tartaglia MC, Wilson SM, Henry ML, Filippi M, Agosta F, Dronkers NF, Henry RG, Ogar JM, Miller BL, Gorno-Tempini ML. White matter damage in primary progressive aphasias: a diffusion tensor tractography study. Brain. 2011 Jun 11.
    7. Lundgren K, Helm-Estabrooks N, Klein R. Stuttering Following Acquired Brain Damage: A Review of the Literature. J Neurolinguistics. 2010 Sep 1;23(5):447-454.
    8. [No authors listed] Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Weekly clinicopathological exercises. Case 43-1988. A 52-year-old man with persistent watery diarrhea and aphasia. N Engl J Med. 1988 Oct 27;319(17):1139-48
    9. Molteni N, Bardella MT, Baldassarri AR, Bianchi PA. Celiac disease associated with epilepsy and intracranial calcifications: report of two patients. Am J Gastroenterol. 1988 Sep;83(9):992-4.
    10. http://ezinearticles.com/?Food-Allergy-and-Stuttering-Link&id=1235725 
    11. http://www.craig.copperleife.com/health/stuttering_allergies.htm 
    12. https://www.celiac.com/forums/topic/73362-any-help-is-appreciated/
    13. Ford RP. The gluten syndrome: a neurological disease. Med Hypotheses. 2009 Sep;73(3):438-40. Epub 2009 Apr 29.
    14. Hadjivassiliou M, Gibson A, Davies-Jones GA, Lobo AJ, Stephenson TJ, Milford-Ward A. Does cryptic gluten sensitivity play a part in neurological illness? Lancet. 1996 Feb 10;347(8998):369-71.

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 06/14/2018 - Refractory celiac disease type II (RCDII) is a rare complication of celiac disease that has high death rates. To diagnose RCDII, doctors identify a clonal population of phenotypically aberrant intraepithelial lymphocytes (IELs). 
    However, researchers really don’t have much data regarding the frequency and significance of clonal T cell receptor (TCR) gene rearrangements (TCR-GRs) in small bowel (SB) biopsies of patients without RCDII. Such data could provide useful comparison information for patients with RCDII, among other things.
    To that end, a research team recently set out to try to get some information about the frequency and importance of clonal T cell receptor (TCR) gene rearrangements (TCR-GRs) in small bowel (SB) biopsies of patients without RCDII. The research team included Shafinaz Hussein, Tatyana Gindin, Stephen M Lagana, Carolina Arguelles-Grande, Suneeta Krishnareddy, Bachir Alobeid, Suzanne K Lewis, Mahesh M Mansukhani, Peter H R Green, and Govind Bhagat.
    They are variously affiliated with the Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, and the Department of Medicine at the Celiac Disease Center, New York Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA. Their team analyzed results of TCR-GR analyses performed on SB biopsies at our institution over a 3-year period, which were obtained from eight active celiac disease, 172 celiac disease on gluten-free diet, 33 RCDI, and three RCDII patients and 14 patients without celiac disease. 
    Clonal TCR-GRs are not infrequent in cases lacking features of RCDII, while PCPs are frequent in all disease phases. TCR-GR results should be assessed in conjunction with immunophenotypic, histological and clinical findings for appropriate diagnosis and classification of RCD.
    The team divided the TCR-GR patterns into clonal, polyclonal and prominent clonal peaks (PCPs), and correlated these patterns with clinical and pathological features. In all, they detected clonal TCR-GR products in biopsies from 67% of patients with RCDII, 17% of patients with RCDI and 6% of patients with gluten-free diet. They found PCPs in all disease phases, but saw no significant difference in the TCR-GR patterns between the non-RCDII disease categories (p=0.39). 
    They also noted a higher frequency of surface CD3(−) IELs in cases with clonal TCR-GR, but the PCP pattern showed no associations with any clinical or pathological feature. 
    Repeat biopsy showed that the clonal or PCP pattern persisted for up to 2 years with no evidence of RCDII. The study indicates that better understanding of clonal T cell receptor gene rearrangements may help researchers improve refractory celiac diagnosis. 
    Source:
    Journal of Clinical Pathologyhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205023

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 06/13/2018 - There have been numerous reports that olmesartan, aka Benicar, seems to trigger sprue‐like enteropathy in many patients, but so far, studies have produced mixed results, and there really hasn’t been a rigorous study of the issue. A team of researchers recently set out to assess whether olmesartan is associated with a higher rate of enteropathy compared with other angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs).
    The research team included Y.‐H. Dong; Y. Jin; TN Tsacogianis; M He; PH Hsieh; and JJ Gagne. They are variously affiliated with the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, MA, USA; the Faculty of Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Science at National Yang‐Ming University in Taipei, Taiwan; and the Department of Hepato‐Gastroenterology, Chi Mei Medical Center in Tainan, Taiwan.
    To get solid data on the issue, the team conducted a cohort study among ARB initiators in 5 US claims databases covering numerous health insurers. They used Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for enteropathy‐related outcomes, including celiac disease, malabsorption, concomitant diagnoses of diarrhea and weight loss, and non‐infectious enteropathy. In all, they found nearly two million eligible patients. 
    They then assessed those patients and compared the results for olmesartan initiators to initiators of other ARBs after propensity score (PS) matching. They found unadjusted incidence rates of 0.82, 1.41, 1.66 and 29.20 per 1,000 person‐years for celiac disease, malabsorption, concomitant diagnoses of diarrhea and weight loss, and non‐infectious enteropathy respectively. 
    After PS matching comparing olmesartan to other ARBs, hazard ratios were 1.21 (95% CI, 1.05‐1.40), 1.00 (95% CI, 0.88‐1.13), 1.22 (95% CI, 1.10‐1.36) and 1.04 (95% CI, 1.01‐1.07) for each outcome. Patients aged 65 years and older showed greater hazard ratios for celiac disease, as did patients receiving treatment for more than 1 year, and patients receiving higher cumulative olmesartan doses.
    This is the first comprehensive multi‐database study to document a higher rate of enteropathy in olmesartan initiators as compared to initiators of other ARBs, though absolute rates were low for both groups.
    Source:
    Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics