Research paperStrategies to improve the efficiency of celiac disease diagnosis in the laboratory

- In celiac disease screening in the laboratory, opportunistic detection has advantages over restricted testing.
- Use of a suitable algorithm is more cost-effective than simply opting for the cheapest test kit.
- A well-defined algorithm reaches the greatest efficiency when the strengths and limitations of every technique are known.
- This algorithm can be optimized further by using a combination of techniques to reduce costs and response time.

The demand for testing to detect celiac disease (CD) autoantibodies has increased, together with the cost per case diagnosed, resulting in the adoption of measures to restrict laboratory testing. We designed this study to determine whether opportunistic screening to detect CD-associated autoantibodies had advantages compared to efforts to restrict testing, and to identify the most cost-effective diagnostic strategy. We compared a group of 1678 patients in which autoantibody testing was restricted to cases in which the test referral was considered appropriate (G1) to a group of 2140 patients in which test referrals were not reviewed or restricted (G2). Two algorithms A (quantifying IgA and Tissue transglutaminase IgA [TG-IgA] in all patients), and B (quantifying only TG-IgA in all patients) were used in each group, and the cost-effectiveness of each strategy was calculated. TG-IgA autoantibodies were positive in 62 G1 patients and 69 G2 patients. Among those positive for tissue transglutaminase IgA and endomysial IgA autoantibodies, the proportion of patients with de novo autoantibodies was lower (p = 0.028) in G1 (11/62) than in G2 (24/69). Algorithm B required fewer determinations than algorithm A in both G1 (2310 vs 3493; p < 0.001) and G2 (2196 vs 4435; p < 0.001). With algorithm B the proportion of patients in whom IgA was tested was lower (p < 0.001) in G2 (29/2140) than in G1 (617/1678). The lowest cost per case diagnosed (4.63 euros/patient) was found with algorithm B in G2. We conclude that opportunistic screening has advantages compared to efforts in the laboratory to restrict CD diagnostic testing. The most cost-effective strategy was based on the use of an appropriate algorithm.