Publications Standardizing Randomized Controlled Trials in Celiac Disease: An International Multidisciplinary Appropriateness Study Citation Lebwohl B, Ma C, Lagana SM, Pai RK, Baker KA, Zayadi A, Hogan M, Bouma G, Cellier C, Goldsmith JD, Lundin KEA, Pinto-Sanchez MI, Robert ME, Rubio-Tapia A, Sanders DS, Schaeffer DF, Semrad CE, Silvester JA, Verdú EF, Verma R, Wu TT, Feagan BG, Crowley E, Jairath V, Murray JA. Standardizing Randomized Controlled Trials in Celiac Disease: An International Multidisciplinary Appropriateness Study. Gastroenterology. 2024 Jan;166(1):88-102. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.08.051. Epub 2023 Sep 11. PMID: 37704112. Abstract Background & aims: There is a need to develop safe and effective pharmacologic options for the treatment of celiac disease (CeD); however, consensus on the appropriate design and configuration of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this population is lacking. Methods: A 2-round modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method study was conducted. Eighteen gastroenterologists (adult and pediatric) and gastrointestinal pathologists voted on statements pertaining to the configuration of CeD RCTs, inclusion and exclusion criteria, gluten challenge, and trial outcomes. Two RCT designs were considered, representing the following distinct clinical scenarios for which pharmacotherapy may be used: trials incorporating a gluten challenge to simulate exposure; and trials evaluating reversal of histologic changes, despite attempted adherence to a gluten-free diet. Each statement was rated as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate, using a 9-point Likert scale. Results: For trials evaluating prevention of relapse after gluten challenge, participants adherent to a gluten-free diet for 12 months or more with normal or near-normal-sized villi should be enrolled. Gluten challenge should be FODMAPS (fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols) free, and efficacy evaluated using histology with a secondary patient-reported outcome measure. For trials evaluating reversal of villus atrophy, the panel voted it appropriate to enroll participants with a baseline villus height to crypt depth ratio ≤2 and measure efficacy using a primary histologic end point. Guidance for measuring histologic, endoscopic, and patient-reported outcomes in adult and pediatric patients with CeD are provided, along with recommendations regarding the merits and limitations of different end points. Conclusions: We developed standardized recommendations for clinical trial design, eligibility criteria, outcome measures, gluten challenge, and disease evaluations for RCTs in patients with CeD. Keywords: Celiac; Gluten; Histology; Patient-Reported Outcomes. Tags Celiac Disease, Histology, Patient-reported Outcomes Read More