Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 335

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Recent advances in coeliac disease

Open access
van Heel, D A, West, J·2006·Gut

Abstract

he management of coeliac disease is an increasing part of a gastroenterologist's workload.Recent prevalence studies suggest ,1% of the general UK population have positive coeliac serology, which combined with increasing population and primary care awareness is leading to more and more referrals.The majority of contemporary referrals are now initially diagnosed by highly sensitive and specific serological tests followed by readily performed endoscopic biopsy (fig 1).Consequently, we now identify many more patients with no or only mild clinical symptoms, making the classical scenario of diarrhoea/steatorrhoea and weight loss a comparative rarity.Much of the early data on clinical aspects of classical coeliac disease (that is, published pre ,1990) may not be applicable to contemporary coeliac disease.These changes in clinical practice have been paralleled by a dramatic increase in our knowledge of disease pathogenesis, making coeliac disease the best understood human ''autoimmune'' disorder.In this review article, we present selected major recent advances in both clinical and basic science aspects of coeliac disease, focusing on the many high quality studies published within the last five years. OCCURRENCE OF COELIAC DISEASE cGeneral population based prevalence studies of undetected coeliac disease Several serological screening studies from Europe, South America, Australasia, and the USA have shown that approximately 0.5-1% of these populations may have undetected coeliac disease.The most consistent estimate reported from the largest population based studies is approximately 1%.The prevalence is even higher in first and second degree relatives of people with coeliac disease. 1 In the five studies shown in table 1, general population based samples of children were recruited for coeliac disease screening.The two earlier Italian studies (using antigliadin antibody testing followed by antiendomysial antibody and small bowel biopsy) suggested a prevalence of 1 in 93 of undetected coeliac disease. 2 3 These findings have been replicated in two further large studies, one from the UK and one from Finland.The recent Bristol study used blood stored anonymously for the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (a population based birth cohort study established in 1990). 4This study tested 5470 children for antitissue transglutami- nase antibody and then those who were positive with a further antiendomysial antibody test.Maki et al tested 3654 Finnish students for both serological tests and offered small intestinal biopsy to those who were positive. 5Both of these studies found a prevalence of approximately 1 in 100.The study of Saharawi children by Catassi et al showed the highest coeliac disease prevalence (5%). 6This cohort, comprising refugees living in an Algerian province, was tested for antiendomysial antibody and a sample of positive individuals had small intestinal mucosa biopsy.Reasons for this high prevalence, which is markedly different to all the other general population estimates, are unclear.The authors speculated that coeliac disease might confer some ''protection'' against intestinal infections or parasites.Selected adult general population based screening studies for coeliac disease are shown in table 2. Three of these studies used populations recruited for the World Health Organisation MONICA project (monitoring of trends and determinants in cardiovascular disease) and were similar in design, with samples randomly selected from population registers stratified by age and sex. 7-9All three of these studies (and the Argentinean study) used a combination of antigliadin antibody and antiendomysial antibody testing to identify people with previously undetected coeliac disease, but not all reported small intestinal biopsy.Other studies used antiendomysial antibody as the main test for identifying people with undetected coeliac disease.It is notable that the prevalence of undetected coeliac disease in both children and adults is very similar (approximately 1%) in the two recent large UK based studies. 4 10It therefore seems probable that the coeliac trait starts in early childhood in all cases, even in those who are subsequently diagnosed as adults.The search for the initial trigger resulting in the breakdown of oral tolerance to dietary wheat, rye, and barley therefore needs to focus on in utero events and 1037 www.gutjnl.

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 · 10.1136/gut.2005.075119

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 335

Metadata

Authors
van Heel, D. A., & West, J.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2006-06-09
Volume
55
Issue
7
Pages
1037-1046
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2112182790
Cited by
335
References
1
FWCI
28.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Recent advances in coeliac disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.2005.075119
The paper
van Heel, D. A., & West, J. (2006). Recent advances in coeliac disease. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2005.075119

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.