• 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

    81,119
    Total Members
    4,125
    Most Online
    Ashleeanne
    Newest Member
    Ashleeanne
    Joined
  • 0

    Endoscopic Biopsy Technique in the Diagnosis of Celiac Disease: One Bite or Two?


    Jefferson Adams

    Celiac.com 03/18/2015 - Getting high-quality biopsy specimens is key to making accurate celiac disease diagnoses. Endoscopists may take either a single- or double-biopsy specimen with each pass of the forceps.


    Ads by Google:




    ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ADS
    Ads by Google:



    Photo: CC--LabomikroDoes it matter whether they take one or two? Is two better than one?

    A team of researchers recently set out to answer those questions, by comparing the quality of biopsy specimens obtained with the single-biopsy and double-biopsy techniques.

    The research team includes M. Latorre, S.M. Lagana, D.E. Freedberg, S.K. Lewis, B. Lebwohl, G. Bhagat, and P. H. Green of the Celiac Disease Center, Department of Medicine, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.

    Their prospective cohort study looked at patients undergoing upper endoscopy with confirmed, suspected, or unknown celiac disease status. A total of 86 patients enrolled in the study, 47% with known celiac disease, 36% with suspected celiac disease, and 17% with an unknown celiac disease status.

    In each case, patients received four biopsy specimens from the second portion of the duodenum. Two were made using the single-biopsy technique of 1 bite per pass of the forceps, and two more using the double-biopsy technique, which takes 2 bites per pass of the forceps.

    Specimens were blindly reviewed to determine orientation, consecutive crypt-to-villous units, and Marsh score. Well-oriented biopsy specimens were noted in 66% of patients with the single-biopsy technique and 42% of patients with the double-biopsy technique (P < .01).

    Analysis of matched pairs showed improved orientation with the single-biopsy technique (odds ratio 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.1; P < .01). This persisted in subgroup analysis of patients with known celiac disease (P = .02), villous atrophy (P = .02), and a final diagnosis of celiac disease (P < .01).

    Now, this is just a single-center trial, so results need to be compared with results from additional cities.

    Interestingly, these results suggest that one bite is actually better than two, because the single-biopsy technique improves the yield of well-oriented duodenal biopsy specimens.

    For best results, the endoscopists should consider taking only one biopsy specimen per pass of the forceps in patients undergoing biopsies of the duodenal mucosa.

    Source:


    0


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    There are no comments to display.



    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.


  • Ads by Google:

  • About Me

    Jefferson Adams is a freelance writer living in San Francisco. He has covered Health News for Examiner.com, and provided health and medical content for Sharecare.com. His work has appeared in Antioch Review, Blue Mesa Review, CALIBAN, Hayden's Ferry Review, Huffington Post, the Mississippi Review, and Slate, among others.

  • Popular Contributors

  • Who's Online   19 Members, 0 Anonymous, 331 Guests (See full list)

  • Related Articles

    Scott Adams
    IgA class Reticulin antibodies are found only in Celiac disease and dermatitis herpetiformis. These antibodies are found in approximately 60% of celiac disease patients and 25% of DH patients. This test is falling into disuse because of the limited utility and the availability of better tests. IgA class endomysial antibodies are very specific, occurring only in celiac disease and DH. These antibodies are found in approximately 80% of patient with DH and in essentially 100% of patients with active celiac disease. IgA endomysial antibodies are more sensitive and specific than either reticulin or gliadin antibodies for diagnosis of celiac disease. Antibody titers are found to parallel morphological changes in the jejunum and can also reflect compliance with gluten-free diets. Titers decrease or become negative in patients on gluten free diets and reappear upon gluten challenge.
    The purpose of testing for anti-gliadin antibodies includes, in addition to diagnosis of gluten sensitive enteropathy, monitoring for compliance to a gluten free diet. IgA gliadin antibodies increase rapidly in response to gluten in the diet, and decrease rapidly when gluten is absent from the diet. The IgA anti-gliadin antibodies can totally disappear in 2-6 months on a gluten-free diet, so they are useful as a diet control. By contrast, IgG anti-gliadin antibodies need a long time, sometimes more than a year, to become negative.
    The reverse is also true. That is, a patient with celiac disease who has been on a gluten-free diet and tests negative for IgA anti-gliadin antibodies, will show a rapid increase in antibody production when challenged by gluten in the diet. Approximately 90% of challenged patients will yield a positive IgA anti-gliadin result within 14-35 days after being challenged. The test results you reported are consistent with a patient who is conforming to a gluten-free diet.

    Dr. Ron Hoggan, Ed.D.
    This article originally appeared in the Autumn 2002 edition of Celiac.coms Scott-Free newsletter.
    Copyright &COPY; 2002 Scott Adams. All rights reserved worldwide.
    Five years ago I became concerned about weakness in my bones after a couple of surprising fractures. At one point, I broke a rib while shingling a storage-shed roof. I leaned across the peak of the roofs ridge to pick up a shingle. I never expected such light pressure to cause a problem, however, I felt a sudden, sharp pain, and heard an odd sound. This, along with a couple of less dramatic, but similar injuries, caused me enough concern to begin looking into the question of celiac disease and bone strength.
    My explorations taught me that calcium absorption probably is not our main problem. People with celiac disease seem to be able to absorb adequate calcium1, but the primary problem appears to come from excreting too much of it, thus causing us to lose more calcium than we are absorbing. I also learned that research shows little or no benefit from calcium supplementation for celiac patients, while magnesium supplementation alone results in significant improvements2. The explanation for this may be that some of the antibodies caused by active celiac disease attack the parathyroid gland3. This organ is an important player in regulating calcium metabolism. Magnesium is necessary for the body to repair the parathyroid and to maintain its continued good function.
    Being convinced by this research, I began to take magnesium supplements without any calcium. I found that I had to be careful. Too much had me visiting the washroom frequently, and I was afraid that too little would fail to provide me the benefits I was seeking.
    At the same time, I also requested a bone density test. I wanted objective information that would allow me to evaluate the progress I hoped to make. The first test was conducted in March of 1997. The results (called "T scores") are reported based on comparison with the density of bones found in young adults. For instance, a score of 0 indicates that the bone density is about the same as would be found in an average young adult. A score in the minus range indicates a bone that has less mineral and more pores than is found in the same young adult. Thus, a score of –1.0 to –2.5 indicates mild mineral losses, while a score of –2.5 or lower indicates osteoporosis.
    My test results were not as bad as I had feared. The mineral density in my lower back was normal for my age, at –0.23. However, my upper leg, where it fits into my hip, was reported as –2.02, and my forearm was slightly stronger than that of a normal young adult at +0.19.
    As I saw it, there were only two causes for concern. First, at the tender age of 50, my hips were very close to osteoporotic, and certainly at a substantially increased risk of fracture. Such fractures can be very serious. Secondly, since only three skeletal areas had been tested for mineral density—and since there was such a wide range of density reported for each of these areas, it seemed impossible to estimate the density of the rest of the bones in my body.
    About three years after my first bone density test, some Calgary-based research made me suspect that the amount of vitamin D supplements I was taking might be too low4. I increased my intake to 1,000 IU daily.
    By the fall of 2001, I began to wonder if I was being foolish by avoiding calcium supplements based on the reports I had read. I therefore began to supplement 350 mg of calcium each day.
    In July of 2002, I underwent a second bone scan. They did not test my forearm, but the other two areas appear to have improved substantially. The T score for my lower back was now at + 0.06, and the T score for my hip had improved to –0.72.
    I realize that what I am reporting is just one persons experience. It is what the medical professionals call "anecdotal," and does not usually carry much weight. However, my experience does support the only published research of the impact of mineral supplements on bone density in celiac patients that I can find. Based on my own experience, and the relevant research, I am now convinced that magnesium is the most important supplement to consider in the context of celiac disease. I was thrilled to read my latest bone density report. Vitamin D may also be an important factor, but limitations of time and space force me to leave this topic for another day.

    References:
    Marsh MN. Bone disease and gluten sensitivity: time to act, to treat, and to prevent. Am J Gastroenterol. 1994 Dec;89(12):2105-7. Rude RK, Olerich M. Magnesium deficiency: possible role in osteoporosis associated with gluten-sensitive enteropathy. Osteoporos Int. 1996;6(6):453-61. Kumar V, Valeski JE, Wortsman J. Celiac disease and hypoparathyroidism: cross-reaction of endomysial antibodies with parathyroid tissue. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 1996 Mar;3(2):143-6. Embry AF, Snowdon LR, Vieth R. Vitamin D and seasonal fluctuations of gadolinium-enhancing magnetic resonance imaging lesions in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. 2000 Aug;48(2):271-2. Ron Hoggan is an author, teacher and diagnosed celiac who lives in Canada. His new book "Dangerous Grains" is available at Celiac.com.

    Scott Adams
    Celiac.com 11/08/2005 - Today a team of scientists at Alba Therapeutics Corporation (Alba) and the University of Maryland School of Medicine reported a direct link between gluten-induced intestinal permeability and zonulin in tissues from patients with celiac disease. The investigators were able to successfully prevent gluten-induced intestinal tissue leak with the administration of the zonulin antagonist FZI/0 (AT-1001). AT-1001 is an orally administered peptide currently under development for the treatment of celiac disease. Published in the November issue of the Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, these results describe the role that leaky gut plays in celiac disease and the role that zonulin plays in establishing the leak. These results are another milestone towards understanding the role of zonulin in celiac disease, says Alessio Fasano, M.D., lead author of the paper, professor of pediatrics, medicine and physiology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and director of its Center for Celiac Research.
    These results reinforce our conviction that AT-1001 has great therapeutic potential and we look forward to confirming these observations in celiac patients soon, stated Alba CEO Dr. Blake M. Paterson.
    About Zonulin
    Zonulin is a signaling protein that transiently and reversibly opens the tight junctions (tj) between the cells of epithelial and endothelial tissues such as the intestinal mucosa, blood brain barrier and pulmonary epithelia. Zonulin appears to be involved in many diseases in which leakage occurs via paracellular transport across epithelial and endothelial tight junctions (tj),
    and thus may play an important potential role in the treatment of autoimmune diseases.
    About Celiac Disease
    Celiac disease is a T-cell mediated auto-immune disease that occurs in genetically susceptible individuals and is characterized by small intestinal inflammation, injury and intolerance to gluten. According to the National Institutes of Health, celiac disease affects approximately 3 million Americans, although the diagnosis is rarely made. The only treatment for celiac disease is complete elimination of gluten from the diet, which results in remission for some patients.
    About Alba
    Alba Therapeutics Corporation is a privately held biopharmaceutical company based in Baltimore, Maryland. Alba is dedicated to commercializing disease-modifying therapeutics and drug delivery adjuvants based on the zonulin pathway. Albas lead molecule, AT-1001, is targeted towards the treatment of celiac disease and other auto-immune illnesses.
    Contact: Dr. Blake Paterson
    Alba Therapeutics Corporation
    (410) 522-8708

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 06/15/2012 - Diagnosing celiac disease can be challenging for doctors if a patient has already started a gluten-free diet, and/or when test results are inconsistent.
    A research team set out to evaluate the in vitro gliadin challenge in such patients. Researchers included Raffaella Tortora MD; Ilaria Russo PhD; Giovanni D De Palma MD; Alessandro Luciani PhD; Antonio Rispo MD; Fabiana Zingone MD; Paola Iovino MD; Pietro Capone MD; and Carolina Ciacci MD
    They are variously affiliated with the Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine at Federico II University of Naples in Naples, Italy; the Department of Surgery, Endoscopy Unit at Federico II University of Naples in Naples, Italy; the Institute of Pediatrics at the University of Foggia in Foggia, Italy; and the University of Salerno, School of Medicine, Gastroenterology at Campus di Baronissi in Salerno, Italy.
    For their study, the team included 57 patients without celiac disease (negative controls), 166 patients with untreated celiac disease and 55 patients with celiac disease following a gluten-free diet (positive controls), and 59 patients with difficult diagnosis.
    The team conducted duodenal biopsies on all patients which provided the data for diagnosing the celiac disease and for the in vitro evaluation of the gliadin-induced mucosal expression of seven inflammatory markers: PY99, ICAM-1 (intercellular cell adhesion molecule), HLA-DR, CD3, CD25, CD69, and transglutaminase 2 IgA.
    As part of their diagnostic work-up for celiac disease, the team included a test for specific serum antibodies. The team asked patients in the difficult diagnosis group to discontinue their gluten-free diets to that they could test for antibodies under untreated conditions.
    To maintain statistical accuracy, the team used the area under the receptor-operated curve (ROC) to analyze the results.
    They found that HLA-DR was most accurate in diagnosing celiac disease on negative controls and positive controls, excluding patients on a gluten-free diet (area under ROC=0.99). Test accuracy did not increase by combining HLA-DR data with data of other markers.
    The results were similar in the 39 patients of the difficult diagnosis group who underwent the test for celiac disease-specific antibodies under untreated conditions.
    Finally, the results showed that in vitro response of mucosal HLA-DR to gliadin is an accurate tool for diagnosing celiac disease, including in patients with difficult diagnosis.
    Source:
    The American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2012;107(1):111-117.

  • Recent Articles

    Christina Kantzavelos
    Celiac.com 07/20/2018 - During my Vipassana retreat, I wasn’t left with much to eat during breakfast, at least in terms of gluten free options. Even with gluten free bread, the toasters weren’t separated to prevent cross contamination. All of my other options were full of sugar (cereals, fruits), which I try to avoid, especially for breakfast. I had to come up with something that did not have sugar, was tasty, salty, and gave me some form of protein. After about four days of mixing and matching, I was finally able to come up with the strangest concoction, that may not look the prettiest, but sure tastes delicious. Actually, if you squint your eyes just enough, it tastes like buttery popcorn. I now can’t stop eating it as a snack at home, and would like to share it with others who are looking for a yummy nutritious snack. 
    Ingredients:
    4 Rice cakes ⅓ cup of Olive oil  Mineral salt ½ cup Nutritional Yeast ⅓ cup of Sunflower Seeds  Intriguing list, right?...
    Directions (1.5 Servings):
    Crunch up the rice into small bite size pieces.  Throw a liberal amount of nutritional yeast onto the pieces, until you see more yellow than white.  Add salt to taste. For my POTS brothers and sisters, throw it on (we need an excess amount of salt to maintain a healthy BP).  Add olive oil  Liberally sprinkle sunflower seeds. This is what adds the protein and crunch, so the more, the tastier.  Buen Provecho, y Buen Camino! 

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 07/19/2018 - Maintaining a gluten-free diet can be an on-going challenge, especially when you factor in all the hidden or obscure gluten that can trip you up. In many cases, foods that are naturally gluten-free end up contain added gluten. Sometimes this can slip by us, and that when the suffering begins. To avoid suffering needlessly, be sure to keep a sharp eye on labels, and beware of added or hidden gluten, even in food labeled gluten-free.  Use Celiac.com's SAFE Gluten-Free Food List and UNSAFE Gluten-free Food List as a guide.
    Also, beware of these common mistakes that can ruin your gluten-free diet. Watch out for:
    Watch out for naturally gluten-free foods like rice and soy, that use gluten-based ingredients in processing. For example, many rice and soy beverages are made using barley enzymes, which can cause immune reactions in people with celiac disease. Be careful of bad advice from food store employees, who may be misinformed themselves. For example, many folks mistakenly believe that wheat-based grains like spelt or kamut are safe for celiacs. Be careful when taking advice. Beware of cross-contamination between food store bins selling raw flours and grains, often via the food scoops. Be careful to avoid wheat-bread crumbs in butter, jams, toaster, counter surface, etc. Watch out for hidden gluten in prescription drugs. Ask your pharmacist for help about anything you’re not sure about, or suspect might contain unwanted gluten. Watch out for hidden gluten in lotions, conditioners, shampoos, deodorants, creams and cosmetics, (primarily for those with dermatitis herpetaformis). Be mindful of stamps, envelopes or other gummed labels, as these can often contain wheat paste. Use a sponge to moisten such surfaces. Be careful about hidden gluten in toothpaste and mouthwash. Be careful about common cereal ingredients, such as malt flavoring, or other non-gluten-free ingredient. Be extra careful when considering packaged mixes and sauces, including soy sauce, fish sauce, catsup, mustard, mayonnaise, etc., as many of these can contain wheat or wheat by-product in their manufacture. Be especially careful about gravy mixes, packets & canned soups. Even some brands of rice paper can contain gluten, so be careful. Lastly, watch out for foods like ice cream and yogurt, which are often gluten-free, but can also often contain added ingredients that can make them unsuitable for anyone on a gluten-free diet. Eating Out? If you eat out, consider that many restaurants use a shared grill or shared cooking oil for regular and gluten-free foods, so be careful. Also, watch for flour in otherwise gluten-free spices, as per above. Ask questions, and stay vigilant.

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 07/18/2018 - Despite many studies on immune development in children, there still isn’t much good data on how a mother’s diet during pregnancy and infancy influences a child’s immune development.  A team of researchers recently set out to assess whether changes in maternal or infant diet might influence the risk of allergies or autoimmune disease.
    The team included Vanessa Garcia-Larsen, Despo Ierodiakonou, Katharine Jarrold, Sergio Cunha,  Jennifer Chivinge, Zoe Robinson, Natalie Geoghegan, Alisha Ruparelia, Pooja Devani, Marialena Trivella, Jo Leonardi-Bee, and Robert J. Boyle.
    They are variously associated with the Department of Undiagnosed Celiac Disease More Common in Women and Girls International Health, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America; the Respiratory Epidemiology, Occupational Medicine and Public Health, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; the Section of Paediatrics, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; the Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; the Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; and Stanford University in the USA.
    Team members searched MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Web of Science, Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Literatura Latino Americana em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS) for observational studies conducted between January 1946 and July 2013, and interventional studies conducted through December 2017, that evaluated the relationship between diet during pregnancy, lactation, or the first year of life, and future risk of allergic or autoimmune disease. 
    They then selected studies, extracted data, and assessed bias risk. They evaluated data using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). They found 260 original studies, covering 964,143 participants, of milk feeding, including 1 intervention trial of breastfeeding promotion, and 173 original studies, covering 542,672 participants, of other maternal or infant dietary exposures, including 80 trials of 26 maternal, 32 infant, or 22 combined interventions. 
    They found a high bias risk in nearly half of the more than 250 milk feeding studies and in about one-quarter of studies of other dietary exposures. Evidence from 19 intervention trials suggests that oral supplementation with probiotics during late pregnancy and lactation may reduce risk of eczema. 44 cases per 1,000; 95% CI 20–64), and 6 trials, suggest that fish oil supplementation during pregnancy and lactation may reduce risk of allergic sensitization to egg. GRADE certainty of these findings was moderate. 
    The team found less evidence, and low GRADE certainty, for claims that breastfeeding reduces eczema risk during infancy, that longer exclusive breastfeeding is associated with reduced type 1 diabetes mellitus, and that probiotics reduce risk of infants developing allergies to cow’s milk. 
    They found no evidence that dietary exposure to other factors, including prebiotic supplements, maternal allergenic food avoidance, and vitamin, mineral, fruit, and vegetable intake, influence risk of allergic or autoimmune disease. 
    Overall, the team’s findings support a connection between the mother’s diet and risk of immune-mediated diseases in the child. Maternal probiotic and fish oil supplementation may reduce risk of eczema and allergic sensitization to food, respectively.
    Stay tuned for more on diet during pregnancy and its role in celiac disease.
    Source:
    PLoS Med. 2018 Feb; 15(2): e1002507. doi:  10.1371/journal.pmed.1002507

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 07/17/2018 - What can fat soluble vitamin levels in newly diagnosed children tell us about celiac disease? A team of researchers recently assessed fat soluble vitamin levels in children diagnosed with newly celiac disease to determine whether vitamin levels needed to be assessed routinely in these patients during diagnosis.
    The researchers evaluated the symptoms of celiac patients in a newly diagnosed pediatric group and evaluated their fat soluble vitamin levels and intestinal biopsies, and then compared their vitamin levels with those of a healthy control group.
    The research team included Yavuz Tokgöz, Semiha Terlemez and Aslıhan Karul. They are variously affiliated with the Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, the Department of Pediatrics, and the Department of Biochemistry at Adnan Menderes University Medical Faculty in Aydın, Turkey.
    The team evaluated 27 female, 25 male celiac patients, and an evenly divided group of 50 healthy control subjects. Patients averaged 9 years, and weighed 16.2 kg. The most common symptom in celiac patients was growth retardation, which was seen in 61.5%, with  abdominal pain next at 51.9%, and diarrhea, seen in 11.5%. Histological examination showed nearly half of the patients at grade Marsh 3B. 
    Vitamin A and vitamin D levels for celiac patients were significantly lower than the control group. Vitamin A and vitamin D deficiencies were significantly more common compared to healthy subjects. Nearly all of the celiac patients showed vitamin D insufficiency, while nearly 62% showed vitamin D deficiency. Nearly 33% of celiac patients showed vitamin A deficiency. 
    The team saw no deficiencies in vitamin E or vitamin K1 among celiac patients. In the healthy control group, vitamin D deficiency was seen in 2 (4%) patients, vitamin D insufficiency was determined in 9 (18%) patients. The team found normal levels of all other vitamins in the healthy group.
    Children with newly diagnosed celiac disease showed significantly reduced levels of vitamin D and A. The team recommends screening of vitamin A and D levels during diagnosis of these patients.
    Source:
    BMC Pediatrics

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 07/16/2018 - Did weak public oversight leave Arizonans ripe for Theranos’ faulty blood tests scam? Scandal-plagued blood-testing company Theranos deceived Arizona officials and patients by selling unproven, unreliable products that produced faulty medical results, according to a new book by Wall Street Journal reporter, whose in-depth, comprehensive investigation of the company uncovered deceit, abuse, and potential fraud.
    Moreover, Arizona government officials facilitated the deception by providing weak regulatory oversight that essentially left patients as guinea pigs, said the book’s author, investigative reporter John Carreyrou. 
    In the newly released "Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup," Carreyrou documents how Theranos and its upstart founder, Elizabeth Holmes, used overblown marketing claims and questionable sales tactics to push faulty products that resulted in consistently faulty blood tests results. Flawed results included tests for celiac disease and numerous other serious, and potentially life-threatening, conditions.
    According to Carreyrou, Theranos’ lies and deceit made Arizonans into guinea pigs in what amounted to a "big, unauthorized medical experiment.” Even though founder Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos duped numerous people, including seemingly savvy investors, Carreyrou points out that there were public facts available to elected officials back then, like a complete lack of clinical data on the company's testing and no approvals from the Food and Drug Administration for any of its tests.
    SEC recently charged the now disgraced Holmes with what it called a 'years-long fraud.’ The company’s value has plummeted, and it is now nearly worthless, and facing dozens, and possibly hundreds of lawsuits from angry investors. Meantime, Theranos will pay Arizona consumers $4.65 million under a consumer-fraud settlement Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich negotiated with the embattled blood-testing company.
    Both investors and Arizona officials, “could have picked up on those things or asked more questions or kicked the tires more," Carreyrou said. Unlike other states, such as New York, Arizona lacks robust laboratory oversight that would likely have prevented Theranos from operating in those places, he added.
    Stay tuned for more new on how the Theranos fraud story plays out.
    Read more at azcentral.com.