Evidence Isn’t There for Celiac Disease Screening, Government Says

The U.S Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has released its draft recommendations about screening for celiac disease in people who aren’t showing symptoms—even if they may be at risk.

The draft says that although the gluten intolerance can cause health problems, there are too many areas with insufficient research to warrant broader screening.

Celiac Disease and Gluten: Quick Facts

With celiac disease, there are two tests that can be done. The first is a serological test (blood test, basically) that has a 40% predictive value (ability to tell if someone will develop celiac) in the general population and up to 70% accuracy in the at-risk population. The second is a biopsy of the small intestine, which is the main way a celiac diagnoses is confirmed but it is an invasive procedure that can have complications.

The Case for Screening

There are cases of what is known as “silent celiac disease”, where someone has the necessary blood and cellular markers for celiac but doesn’t actually show symptoms but may develop celiac later in life. The conversion rate for silent celiac disease is up to 15%, though this is not an area that has gotten much study.

Advertisement

Enhanced screening, particularly in at-risk populations, has the potential to let people know if they have the markers that could lead to developing celiac disease down the line. This would allow them to pre-emptively reduce the gluten in their diet and take other steps to prevent the full emergence of the disease.

The Case Against Screening

One of the issues with any test is that the more you look for something, the more you will find it. This is not an inherently bad thing, but the problem is that any enhanced screening program runs the risk of false positives and overdiagnosis.

A false positive is when someone is told they have a condition they actually do not and overdiagnosis is when someone is diagnosed with a condition that they do have but does not warrant medical intervention.

Risk vs. Reward

According to the USPSTF, the type of high-risk individuals enhanced screening could cover would end up in one of the following categories:

The second and third categories are undesirable outcomes since they subject a patient to unnecessary stress, anxiety, and an invasive procedure with possible complications. The third category has the additional problem of causing someone to start taking what are ultimately unnecessary dietary restrictions and the associated burdens that come with it. Gluten free is not always easy.

There is no currently available method to tell the difference between the third and fourth categories and there is not enough reliable information available to know how many people could benefit from enhanced screening approaches. As a result of all of this, the USPSTF has concluded there is insufficient evidence to assess the balance of harms and benefits for celiac disease screening in patients who are otherwise not showing symptoms.

Bottom Line


Sources:

“Draft Recommendation Statement – Celiac Disease: Screening,” U.S Preventive Services Task Force web site, May 3, 2016; http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/draft-recommendation-statement150/celiac-disease-screening#citation9, last accessed May 4, 2016.

Advertisement

Read More On

Read More on foodsforbetterhealth.com