• 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

    77,276
    Total Members
    3,093
    Most Online
    BekahT
    Newest Member
    BekahT
    Joined
  • 0

    Can Capsule Endoscopy Help to Diagnose Cases of Equivocal Celiac Disease in Adults?


    Jefferson Adams
    Image Caption: Photo: CC-- Capt. Kodak

    Celiac.com 04/01/2013 - There haven't been many studies that evaluate the usefulness of capsule endoscopy in equivocal celiac disease. A team of researchers recently set out to conduct an evaluation of capsule endoscopy in adult celiac disease, and to assess its potential role in equivocal cases of celiac disease compared with patients with biopsy-proven and serology-proven celiac disease who have persisting symptoms.


    Ads by Google:




    ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ADS
    Ads by Google:



    Photo: CC-- Capt. KodakThe research team included M. Kurien, K.E. Evans, I. Aziz, R. Sidhu, K. Drew, T.L. Rogers, M.E. McAlindon, and D.S.Sanders. They are affiliated with the Department of Gastroenterology at Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom.

    To determine the use of capsule endoscopy in patients with equivocal celiac disease, compared to patients with biopsy-proven and serology-proven celiac disease who have ongoing symptoms.

    To do this, the team conduced a prospective cohort study of 62 patients with equivocal celiac disease and 69 patients with non-responsive celiac disease.

    They measured outcome according to the diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy in equivocal cases and accuracy of mucosal abnormality detection in patients with non-responsive celiac disease.

    They found that the 62 cases of equivocal celiac disease could be divided into two subgroups: group A, with 32 cases of antibody-negative villous atrophy, and group B with 30 cases of Marsh 1-2 changes.

    In group A, using capsule endoscopy, the team was able to diagnose celiac disease or Crohn's disease in 9 of 32 patients (28%), compared with just 2 of the 30 patients in group B (7%; P = .044).

    In patients with persistent celiac disease symptoms, the team made
    significant capsule endoscopy findings in 8 of 69 patients (12%), including 2 cases of enteropathy-associated lymphoma, 4 cases of type 1 refractory celiac disease, 1 polypoidal mass histologically confirmed to be a fibroepithelial polyp, and 1 case of ulcerative jejunitis.

    This outcome was significantly lower than the diagnostic yield of capsule endoscopy in antibody-negative villous atrophy (P = .048).

    It is important to remember that this study was restricted to a single clinic. That said, this is the first time that researchers have used capsule endoscopy to systematically evaluate equivocal celiac disease.

    Because the diagnostic rates for capsule endoscopy in patients with antibody-negative villous atrophy are better than that of capsule endoscopy in patients with celiac disease with persisting symptoms, the researchers are encouraging the use of capsule endoscopy in equivocal cases, especially in cases where patients antibody-negative villous atrophy.

    Source:

    0


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Guest Donna

    Posted

    Thank you for the information. Since bring diagnosed with Crohn's disease, every bit of detail is paramount and interesting.

    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   16 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,089 Guests (See full list)

  • Related Articles

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 12/10/2012 - In celiac disease, doctors use video capsule endoscopy (VCE) mainly to follow-up on stubborn cases, and to diagnose adenocarcinoma, lymphoma or refractory celiac disease. However, some doctors are suggesting that VCE could replace standard esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and biopsy in certain circumstances.
    A team of researchers recently evaluated the use of VCE to diagnose celiac disease in place of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and biopsy under certain circumstances.
    The research team included Matthew S. Chang, Moshe Rubin, Suzanne K Lewis, and Peter H. Green. They are variously affiliated with the Celiac Disease Center, Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases of the Department of Medicine at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York, and with the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology of the Department of Medicine at New York Hospital Queens, Weill Cornell Medical College in Flushing, New York.
    For their study, the team evaluated eight patients with suspected celiac disease who were diagnosed by VCE.
    Of the eight patients, four underwent EGD and biopsy, with negative biopsy results. Two patients declined the procedure, and two showed contradictory results due to hemophilia and von Willebrand disease.
    Using VCE, the team found that all patients showed mucosal scalloping, mucosal mosaicism and reduced folds in either the duodenum or jejunum.
    After treatment with a gluten-free diet, seven patients who participated in follow-up showed improvement in either their blood tests, or their presenting clinical symptoms.
    From this small study, the team concludes that VCE and the observation of the classic mucosal changes of villous atrophy may replace biopsy as the mode of diagnosis for celiac disease in patients who either decline EGD, or show contradictory results, or in suspect patients with negative duodenal biopsy.
    They encourage further study to determine the role and cost of using VCE to diagnose celiac disease.
    Source:
    BMC Gastroenterolohy. 2012;12(90)

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 01/30/2013 - Currently, doctors diagnose celiac disease with blood tests that screen for two antibodies, one that targets gluten and another that goes after an intestinal protein. The tests work pretty well to spot advanced cases of celiac disease, but by that time, patients are already suffering intestinal damage.
    A research team looking into a method for reliable earlier detection of celiac disease focused on the responses of certain bacteria to celiac disease.
    They have built a library of peptides on the surfaces of bacteria which capture new antibodies associated with celiac disease. This, in turn, has led them to a new technique for harvesting celiac disease antibodies, which may help improve diagnosis for celiac disease, especially early on. The researchers say the technique may allow them to successfully tell, much earlier than before, which perspective celiac sufferers are sick and which are healthy.
    The research team included Bradley N. Spatola, Joseph A. Murray, Martin Kagnoff, Katri Kaukinen, and Patrick S. Daugherty. They are affiliated with the Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of California at Santa Barbara, California, the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, the Laboratory of Mucosal Immunology, Department of Medicine and the Department of Pediatrics at the University of California at San Diego in La Jolla, California and with the Department of Gastroenterology and Alimentary Tract Surgery, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
    For their study, Patrick Daugherty, of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and his team aimed to find previously unknown disease-linked antibodies. Their strategy centered on building an enormous library of random peptide sequences to find ones that would bind to the antibodies.
    To create their library, the researchers inserted one billion random peptide genes into Escherichia coli, with one peptide gene per bacterium.
    Once the genes were expressed inside the bacteria, thousands of copies of the peptides migrated to the cells’ surface. The researchers hoped that some of these peptides would bind antibodies from the blood of people with early-stage celiac disease, but not those in samples from healthy people.
    The team hoped that their approach, with numerous bacteria each bearing a different peptide, would be more likely to identify unknown antibodies than are current types of peptide libraries, which must be mounted on hard surfaces.
    To test their new library approach, the researchers collected blood samples from 40 healthy people and 45 people who had been diagnosed with celiac disease.
    They purified antibodies from the blood samples, then labeled antibodies from half the celiac patients with a green fluorescent dye and the rest of the patients’ antibodies with a red dye.
    They then mixed the peptide-coated bacteria together with all the antibodies, adding five times as many unlabeled antibodies from the healthy subjects to block labeled antibodies from binding to peptides found in people with and without celiac disease.
    Next, they sorted the cells, collecting only those bacteria displaying both red and green fluorescence.
    Cells labeled with both dyes, the researchers reasoned, help a peptide that could bind to an antibody found in at least two people, one patient from each group. These antibodies, they say, could be markers for celiac disease.
    Additional screening of the peptides with antibodies from healthy patients and those with celiac disease, the researchers narrowed the bacterial pool down to six unique peptides, none of which bind to known celiac antibodies.
    The researchers then measured binding between these peptides and the full suite of antibodies from patients’ blood. Based on that data, they used a statistical analysis to conclude that they could identify correctly 85% of people with celiac disease and 91% of healthy – nearly matching the values of existing diagnostic tests.
    It remains uncertain whether this approach will permit doctors to diagnose celiac disease at earlier stages than current methods, but the results look promising, and the team remains hopeful.
    Daugherty says that the method is applicable to other immune disorders, including difficult-to-diagnose illnesses such as lupus, multiple sclerosis, and some cancers.
    Source:
    Anal. Chem., 2013, 85 (2), pp 1215–1222. DOI: 10.1021/ac303201d

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 05/08/2013 - A team of researchers recently set out to test determine if an interactive online intervention might help to improve gluten free diet adherence in adults with celiac disease.
    The research team included Kirby Sainsbury BA/BEd, DCP (candidate), Barbara Mullan PhD and Louise Sharpe PhD. They are affiliated with the School of Psychology, and the Clinical Psychology Unit at the University of Sydney in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    For their controlled trial, the researchers recruited 189 adults with biopsy-confirmed celiac disease. They randomly assigned 101 adults to receive the intervention, and 88 adults to a wait-list control condition.
    They retrieved post-intervention data for 70 intervention subjects and 64 wait-list participants, along with three month follow-up data for 46 of 50 who completed the intervention period.
    The team first measured overall gluten-free diet adherence, then measured gluten-free diet knowledge, quality of life and psychological symptoms.
    The researchers based their results on intention-to-treat analysis, which bases their calculations on initial treatment assignment and not on the treatment eventually received.
    ITT analysis helps avoid various misleading factors that can color intervention research, such as non-random attrition of participants from the study or crossover.
    Overall, the intervention group showed strong improvement in gluten-free diet adherence, and gluten-free diet knowledge following the treatment period compared to the wait-list control group.
    However, changes in knowledge had no effect on adherence. These improvements continued through the 3-month’ follow-up period.
    The results show that the online intervention program helped improve adherence to a gluten-free diet for people with celiac disease. Such a program can be developed into a valuable resource for celiacs who are struggling with gluten-free diet adherence.
    Source:
     Am J Gastroenterol advance online publication 5 March 2013;

  • Recent Articles

    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

    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 06/12/2018 - A life-long gluten-free diet is the only proven treatment for celiac disease. However, current methods for assessing gluten-free diet compliance are lack the sensitivity to detect occasional dietary transgressions that may cause gut mucosal damage. So, basically, there’s currently no good way to tell if celiac patients are suffering gut damage from low-level gluten contamination.
    A team of researchers recently set out to develop a method to determine gluten intake and monitor gluten-free dietary compliance in patients with celiac disease, and to determine its correlation with mucosal damage. The research team included ML Moreno, Á Cebolla, A Muñoz-Suano, C Carrillo-Carrion, I Comino, Á Pizarro, F León, A Rodríguez-Herrera, and C Sousa. They are variously affiliated with Facultad de Farmacia, Departamento de Microbiología y Parasitología, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain; Biomedal S.L., Sevilla, Spain; Unidad Clínica de Aparato Digestivo, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla, Spain; Celimmune, Bethesda, Maryland, USA; and the Unidad de Gastroenterología y Nutrición, Instituto Hispalense de Pediatría, Sevilla, Spain.
    For their study, the team collected urine samples from 76 healthy subjects and 58 patients with celiac disease subjected to different gluten dietary conditions. To quantify gluten immunogenic peptides in solid-phase extracted urines, the team used a lateral flow test (LFT) with the highly sensitive and specific G12 monoclonal antibody for the most dominant GIPs and an LFT reader. 
    They detected GIPs in concentrated urines from healthy individuals previously subjected to gluten-free diet as early as 4-6 h after single gluten intake, and for 1-2 days afterward. The urine test showed gluten ingestion in about 50% of patients. Biopsy analysis showed that nearly 9 out of 10 celiac patients with no villous atrophy had no detectable GIP in urine, while all patients with quantifiable GIP in urine showed signs of gut damage.
    The ability to use GIP in urine to reveal gluten consumption will likely help lead to new and non-invasive methods for monitoring gluten-free diet compliance. The test is sensitive, specific and simple enough for clinical monitoring of celiac patients, as well as for basic and clinical research applications including drug development.
    Source:
    Gut. 2017 Feb;66(2):250-257.  doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310148.