Serological Markers in Suspected Celiac Disease: Diagnostic Performance and Age-Dependent Seroprevalence
Öz
Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic concordance of Tissue Transglutaminase (tTG), Endomysium (EMA), and Deamidated Gliadin Peptide (DGP) antibodies in patients with suspected Celiac Disease (CD), to examine age-related changes in seropositivity, and to identify differences between pediatric and adult populations. Materials and Methods: Data from 4.489 patients tested for suspected CD at the Medical Microbiology Laboratory of … Training and Research Hospital between May 2024 and December 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. tTG antibodies (IgA/IgG) were assayed by micro-ELISA, whereas EMA and DGP antibodies (IgA/IgG) by indirect immunofluorescence. Data were analyzed using chi-square and Cohen’s Kappa (κ) tests. Results: Of the patients, 63.2% were female. Seropositivity for tTG IgA was detected in 89 patients (2.0%). This rate increased significantly with age, rising from 0.9% in the 0-2 age group to 2.7% in the >18 age group (p=0.006). DGP IgA positivity was significantly higher in the 3-18 age group (5.2%). While EMA IgA showed the highest concordance with tTG IgA (κ=0.752), DGP IgG concordance was weak (κ=0.238). Isolated DGP IgG positivity was observed in 8.5% of tTG IgA-negative patients. Conclusion: The 2.0% prevalence detected in symptomatic patients is significantly higher than screenings of healthy populations in Türkiye and increases with age. The combination of tTG IgA and EMA IgA demonstrates strong serological concordance. However, due to its high discordance rate, the routine inclusion of DGP IgG in screening panels appears to offer limited additional value and may increase discordance. Its use may be more appropriately restricted to specific clinical indications, such as the 0-2 age group or suspected IgA deficiency.
Anahtar Kelimeler
- Celiac disease
- deamidated gliadin peptide
- endomysium antibodies
- seroprevalence
- tissue transglutaminase
Destekleyen Kurum
Etik Beyan
Kaynakça
- 1. Ludvigsson JF, Leffler DA, Bai JC, et al. The Oslo definitions for coeliac disease and related terms. Gut. 2013;62(1):43-52. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301346
- 2. King JA, Jeong J, Underwood FE, et al. Incidence of Celiac Disease Is Increasing Over Time: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020;115(4):507-25. doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000000523
- 3. Singh P, Arora A, Strand TA, et al. Global Prevalence of Celiac Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16(6):823-36. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2017.06.037
- 4. Catassi C, Kryszak D, Louis-Jacques O, et al. Detection of Celiac disease in primary care: a multicenter case-finding study in North America. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(7):1454-60. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01173.x
- 5. Schuppan D, Zimmer KP. The diagnosis and treatment of celiac disease. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2013;110(49):835-46. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2013.0835
- 6. Husby S, Koletzko S, Korponay-Szabo I, et al. European Society Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Guidelines for Diagnosing Coeliac Disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2020;70(1):141-56. doi:10.1097/MPG.0000000000002497
- 7. Volta U, Fabbri A, Parisi C, et al. Old and new serological tests for celiac disease screening. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;4(1):31-5. doi:10.1586/egh.09.66
- 8. Al-Toma A, Volta U, Auricchio R, et al. European Society for the Study of Coeliac Disease (ESsCD) guideline for coeliac disease and other gluten-related disorders. United European Gastroenterol J. 2019;7(5):583-613. doi:10.1177/2050640619844125
Ayrıntılar
Birincil Dil
İngilizce
Konular
Temel İmmünoloji
Bölüm
Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar
Betül Günaydın
0000-0001-9864-838X
Türkiye
Yayımlanma Tarihi
21 Haziran 2026
Gönderilme Tarihi
14 Ocak 2026
Kabul Tarihi
5 Mart 2026
Yayımlandığı Sayı
Yıl 2026 Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2