Comparative Usefulness of Deamidated Gliadin Antibodies in the Diagnosis of Celiac Disease  Shadi Rashtak, Michael W. Ettore, Henry A. Homburger, Joseph A. Murray  Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology  Volume 6, Issue 4, Pages 426-432 (April 2008) DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2007.12.030 Copyright © 2008 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 ROC curves for AGA II–IgA (solid line), AGA II–IgG (dotted line), and AGA II–IgA+G (dashed line) based on 92 celiac patients and 124 controls. True-positive (Y-axis) and false-positive (X-axis) rates are plotted together using each point as indicated on the semiquantitative scale as the cut-off point. There was no significant difference between the ROC curves for all 3 AGA II antibodies. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2008 6, 426-432DOI: (10.1016/j.cgh.2007.12.030) Copyright © 2008 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Difference in sensitivity by degree of villous atrophy. Percentage of positive results for each test in biopsy-proven untreated celiac patients with TVA (N = 42) vs PVA (N = 50). *P < .05, **P < .01 (P values were obtained by chi-square test). Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2008 6, 426-432DOI: (10.1016/j.cgh.2007.12.030) Copyright © 2008 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Decrease in sensitivity after treatment with a GFD. Percentage of positive results for each test in 59 biopsy-proven celiac patients before and after treatment for a median of 11 months (range, 3–43 mo). *P < .05, **P < .0001 for comparison of sensitivity before and after treatment with a GFD (P values were obtained by the McNemar exact test). GCD, gluten-containing diet; GFD, gluten-free diet. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2008 6, 426-432DOI: (10.1016/j.cgh.2007.12.030) Copyright © 2008 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions