Table 2: Reported effectiveness of IgA and IgG antigliadin antibody (AGA) testing in screening for celiac disease | |||||||||||||||
Study; patient population | No. of patients | AGA test method* | Effectiveness of AGA testing, % | ||||||||||||
Sensitivity | Specificity | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value | ||||||||||||
With disease | Without disease | IgA | IgG | Both | IgA | IgG | Both | IgA | IgG | Both | IgA | IgG | Both | ||
Pediatric Bürgin-Wolff et al10 | 331 | FIST | -- | -- | 89 | -- | -- | 96 | -- | -- | 97 | -- | -- | 87 | |
Guandalini et al11 | 359 | 1376 | ELISA | 91 | 98 | - | 98 | 85 | - | 92 | 63 | | 98 | 99 | -- |
Tucker et al12 | 17 | 114 | ELISA | 73 | 88 | 86 | 65 | 90 | 90 | -- | -- | 56 | -- | -- | -- |
Savilahti et al13
Children < 2 yr | 18 | 36 | ELISA | 100 | 100 | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Children > 2 yr | 11 | 0 | ELISA | 64 | 54 | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Rich et al14 | 15 | 45 | ELISA | 53 | 100 | -- | 93 | 58 | -- | 73 | 44 | -- | 86 | 100 | -- |
Bodé et al15 | 14 | 177 | DIG-ELISA | 79 | 93 | 100 | 98 | 98 | 97 | 79 | 76 | 70 | 98 | 99 | 100 |
Lerner et al16 | 34 | 41 | ELISA | 52 | 88 | 94 | 92 | 87 | 88 | 74 | 92 | ||||
Present study | 30 | 146 | ELISA | 80 | 83 | 93 | 92 | 79 | 71 | 67 | 45 | 43 | 96 | 96 | 98 |
Adult
Hill et al17 | 61 | 283 | ELISA | 93 | -- | -- | 95 | -- | -- | 50 | -- | -- | 99.7 | -- | -- |
O'Farrelly et al18 | 44 | 46 | ELISA | 82 | -- | -- | 87 | -- | -- | 86 | -- | -- | 83 | -- | -- |
McMillan et al19 | 28 | 68 | ELISA | 100 | 57 | -- | 100 | 87 | -- | 100 | 64 | -- | 100 | 83 | -- |
*FIST = fluorescent immunosorbent test; ELISA = enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, DIG = diffusion in gel. |