Long-term Health Outcomes of Screen Detected and Potential Celiac Disease Patients

January 23, 2026 updated by: Tampere University Hospital

The Impact of Active Screening on the Long-term Health of Celiac Disease Patients and the Natural Course of Potential Untreated or Treated Celiac Disease

The primary aim of this project is to investigate how active screening and the timing of diagnosis affect the long-term health outcomes of patients with celiac disease. Additionally, the study seeks to clarify the natural course of so-called potential celiac disease. A key focus is also placed on assessing adherence to a gluten-free diet among screen-detected and, if initiated, potential celiac disease patients, their satisfaction with the diagnosis, and the diet's impact on general health and quality of life.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Not yet recruiting

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Detailed Description

In this retrospective observational cohort study, participants from earlier studies conducted by the Tampere Celiac Disease Research Center are invited for a follow-up visit. The study cohorts include individuals with screen-detected celiac disease (CeD), potential CeD, and subjects previously investigated due to positive CeD serology, but with an unknown diagnostic status. The participants are interviewed and complete structured questionnaires. Blood, urine, stool, and mucosal samples are collected for both routine clinical assessment and research purposes. Bone mineral density is measured using DXA, and a skin biopsy is offered to assess for latent dermatitis herpetiformis. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy is offered to participants with potential CeD who are on a gluten-containing diet, as well as to those experiencing challenges with dietary treatment. Clinical results are compared with healthy relatives and previously studied, treated CeD controls.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
250

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Locations

  • Finland
      • Tampere, Finland, 33520
        • Tampere University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology
        • Contact:
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Pilvi Laurikka, M.D., Ph.D.
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Saana Paavola, M.D., Ph.D.

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Participants of earlier study cohorts investigating potential or screen-detected celiac disease, irrespective of the current diagnostical status.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Finnish citizenship and current residence in Finland

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age <18 years

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
Screen detected CeD
Patients with confirmed celiac disease diagnosis found by screening of the disease
Potential CeD
Patients earlier diagnosed with potential celiac disease and patients who have had celiac disease antibody positivity, but were not investigated further. Current diagnostic and treatment status is mostly unknown.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS)
Time Frame: At the time of study visit
Symptoms are measured with Gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS) questionnaire. The scoring consists of 15 items, which are scored with a 7-grade Likert scale in which 1 point indicates no symptoms and 7 points the most severe gastrointestinal symptoms. Items cover five different symptoms (indigestion, diarrhea, abdominal pain, constipation and reflux) and values for each sub-dimension are calculated as a mean of the relevant items. The total GSRS score is described as a mean value of all 15 items (from 1 to 7 points). Scores of the participants are compared with the result of earlier study when possible.
At the time of study visit
Quality of life (PGWB)
Time Frame: At the time of study visit
Quality of life is measured with Psychological General Well-Being (PGWB) questionnaire. The survey consists of 22 separate items covering six different sub-dimensions: anxiety, depression, well-being, self-control, general health and vitality. The scoring is based on a 6-grade Likert scale in which higher scores indicate better quality of life. The value of the total PGWB score may range from a minimum of 22 to maximum 132. The sub-scores are calculated as a sum of the items in each sub-dimensio. The PGWB results are compared with the result of earlier study when possible.
At the time of study visit

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Celiac disease diagnosis
Time Frame: 2-20 years
How many have received celiac disease diagnosis after previous study?
2-20 years
Gluten-free diet
Time Frame: The time of study visit
Adherence to the dietary treatment, when initiated is assessed by food diaries and Celiac Disease Adherence Test (CDAT) questionnaire. CDAT questionnaire is a 7-item questionnaire. Scoring is from 7 to 35, in which lower scores indicate good adherence and higher scores point towards poor adherence to gluten-free diet.
The time of study visit
Skin symptoms
Time Frame: At the time of study visit
Interview and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) questionnaire. The DLQI is dermatology-spesific index with 10 questonnaire considering the impact of skin disease to quality of life during the last week. Each question is scored with a 4-point Likert scale (0-3), giving the total DLQI score from 0 to 30, a higher score indicating worse quality of life
At the time of study visit
BMI
Time Frame: At the time of the study
Weight (kilograms) and height (centimeters) will be combined as body mass index, kg/m2
At the time of the study
Nutritional status and general health
Time Frame: 2-20 years
Interview and blood tests
2-20 years
Bone mineral density
Time Frame: At the time of the study visit
Bone mineral density is assessed with Duel-energy WX-ray Absorptiometry (DXA). In DXA, T-score compares bone mineral density to values of young, healthy adult. T-score -2.5 or lower indicates osteoporosis and score between -1.0 and -2.4 indicates osteopenia.
At the time of the study visit
Modified Marsh-Oberhuber Classification
Time Frame: 2-20 years
Duodenal histology is evaluated with morphological description and Modified Marsh-Oberhuber classification. In this classification Marsh 0 means entirely normal mucosa, Marsh 1 indicates normal villi and crypts with increased intraepithelial lymphocytes (IEL), Marsh 2 for increased IELs and crypt hyperplasia. Marsh 3 a-c villus atrophy is combined to increased IELs and cryp hyperplasia: Class 3a partial villus atrophy, 3b for subtotal villus atrophy and 3c for total villus atrophy.
2-20 years
Villus hight-Crypt depth Ratio (Vh/CrD)
Time Frame: 2-20 years
Vh/CrD is a morphometric method to assess duodenal histology in addition to classifications like Marsh-Oberhuber. From several well-oriented duodenal samples, villous hight and crypt depth are measured. Ratio <2.0 indicates active celiac disease.
2-20 years

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Tampere University Hospital

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Tampere University
Finnish Medical Foundation

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
March 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
December 1, 2034

Study Completion (Estimated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
December 1, 2034

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
May 2, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 23, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
January 26, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
January 26, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 23, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
January 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • R24071

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Digestive System Diseases

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings