Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 406

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Non-Celiac Wheat Sensitivity Diagnosed by Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Challenge: Exploring a New Clinical Entity

Open access
Carroccio, Antonio, Mansueto, Pasquale, Iacono, Giuseppe, Soresi, Maurizio, D'Alcamo, Alberto, Cavataio, Francesca, Brusca, Ignazio, Florena, Ada M, Ambrosiano, Giuseppe, Seidita, Aurelio, Pirrone, Giuseppe, Rini, Giovanni Battista·2012·American Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Non-celiac wheat sensitivity (WS) is considered a new clinical entity. An increasing percentage of the general population avoids gluten ingestion. However, the real existence of this condition is debated and specific markers are lacking. Our aim was thus to demonstrate the existence of WS and define its clinical, serologic, and histological markers. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical charts of all subjects with an irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)-like presentation who had been diagnosed with WS using a double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) challenge in the years 2001-2011. One hundred celiac disease (CD) patients and fifty IBS patients served as controls. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-six patients with WS, as diagnosed by DBPC challenge, were included. Two groups showing distinct clinical characteristics were identified: WS alone (group 1) and WS associated with multiple food hypersensitivity (group 2). As a whole group, the WS patients showed a higher frequency of anemia, weight loss, self-reported wheat intolerance, coexistent atopy, and food allergy in infancy than the IBS controls. There was also a higher frequency of positive serum assays for IgG/IgA anti-gliadin and cytometric basophil activation in "in vitro" assay. The main histology characteristic of WS patients was eosinophil infiltration of the duodenal and colon mucosa. Patients with WS alone were characterized by clinical features very similar to those found in CD patients. Patients with multiple food sensitivity were characterized by clinical features similar to those found in allergic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm the existence of non-celiac WS as a distinct clinical condition. We also suggest the existence of two distinct populations of subjects with WS: one with characteristics more similar to CD and the other with characteristics pointing to food allergy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ajg.2012.236

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

See all 406

Metadata

Authors
Carroccio, A., Mansueto, P., Iacono, G., Soresi, M., D'Alcamo, A., Cavataio, F., Brusca, I., Florena, A. M., Ambrosiano, G., Seidita, A., Pirrone, G., & Rini, G. B.
Venue
American Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
2012-12
Volume
107
Issue
12
Pages
1898-1906
ISSN
0002-9270 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2059805968
Cited by
406
References
32
FWCI
43.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Non-Celiac Wheat Sensitivity Diagnosed by Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Challenge: Exploring a New Clinical Entity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/ajg.2012.236
The paper
Carroccio, A., Mansueto, P., Iacono, G., Soresi, M., D'Alcamo, A., Cavataio, F., Brusca, I., Florena, A. M., Ambrosiano, G., Seidita, A., Pirrone, G., & Rini, G. B. (2012). Non-Celiac Wheat Sensitivity Diagnosed by Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Challenge: Exploring a New Clinical Entity. American Journal of Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2012.236

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.