Home
JournalsCollections
For Authors For Reviewers For Editorial Board Members
Article Processing Charges Open Access
Ethics Advertising Policy
Editorial Policy Resource Center
Company Information Contact Us Membership Collaborators Partners
OPEN ACCESS

Letter to the Editor: Celiac Disease Diagnosis Pitfalls — Pediatric Pathways, Refractory Stratification, and Seronegative EATL Risk

  • Hakim Rahmoune*  and
  • Nada Boutrid
Journal of Translational Gastroenterology   2026

doi: 10.14218/JTG.2026.00005

Received:

Revised:

Accepted:

Published online:

 Author information

Citation: Rahmoune H, Boutrid N. Letter to the Editor: Celiac Disease Diagnosis Pitfalls — Pediatric Pathways, Refractory Stratification, and Seronegative EATL Risk. J Transl Gastroenterol. Published online: Apr 14, 2026. doi: 10.14218/JTG.2026.00005.

Dear Editors,

Diagnostic pitfalls in celiac disease (CD) extend beyond serologic variability and histologic heterogeneity in adults: clinically significant gaps remain in pediatric recognition, refractory disease stratification, and the detection of seronegative enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (EATL). We read with interest the review by Majmudar et al.,1 and we present complementary observations that extend their proposed framework across age groups and malignancy-risk phenotypes, focusing on three aspects that merit closer integration: the distinct diagnostic dynamics of pediatric CD, the biological and prognostic divergence of refractory celiac disease (RCD) subtypes, and the life-threatening but underrecognized phenotype of seronegative EATL.

First, pediatric CD exhibits diagnostic dynamics that differ substantially from those in adults, justifying age-stratified clinical pathways rather than a uniform framework. Children account for nearly one-third of global CD diagnoses and frequently present with transient seronegativity in early childhood (<5 years) and non-classical manifestations such as growth impairment or dental enamel defects.2,3 These features reflect the developmental immaturity of the immune system rather than a fundamentally different disease entity, yet they carry distinct diagnostic implications: false-negative serology is more common, and serologic thresholds validated in adults cannot be directly transposed to pediatric practice.3,4 Recent ESPGHAN updates document progression from potential to overt CD exceeding 45% at five years in children—substantially faster than adult trajectories—underscoring the need for active surveillance rather than watchful waiting.5 Although ESPGHAN no-biopsy criteria have transformed the management of children with CD, their application remains conditional on strict threshold adherence (tissue transglutaminase immunoglobulin A (IgA) ≥10× ULN with endomysial antibodies positivity), and even within pediatric practice, concomitant infections and IgA deficiency constitute important sources of diagnostic error requiring systematic exclusion.4,5 Furthermore, population-specific studies confirm that genetic susceptibility patterns (i.e., HLA-DQ2/DQ8) are globally conserved while phenotypic expression remains heterogeneous—reinforcing the need for context-adapted diagnostic awareness.6

Second, RCD represents a critical area where the proposed diagnostic framework could be further refined through explicit RCD subtype stratification: negative serology—observed in the majority of patients following gluten withdrawal—cannot exclude persistent immune-mediated enteropathy, and we build on this by emphasizing that failing to distinguish RCD-I from RCD-II has direct prognostic and therapeutic consequences. Specifically, RCD-II, defined by aberrant clonal intraepithelial lymphocytes (IELs) with a CD3+CD8 phenotype (>30%) and interleukin-15–driven activation, carries an approximately 50% cumulative risk of progression to EATL within five years and substantially poorer survival compared to RCD-I.7 IEL flow cytometry and T-cell receptor γ clonality analysis are therefore not merely confirmatory tools but essential components of the diagnostic workup in any patient with persistent villous atrophy on a strict gluten-free diet.7,8 Thus, we propose that future iterations of the diagnostic framework include an explicit branching point at the diagnosis of RCD, prompting immunophenotypic subtyping as a mandatory rather than optional step (Fig. 1).5,7 While seronegative CD is widely acknowledged as a diagnostic challenge, the specific danger of seronegative presentation in malignant enteropathy has received less systematic attention: up to 15% of RCD cases show negative tissue transglutaminase IgA and endomysial antibodies despite florid villous atrophy, creating false reassurance and delaying lymphoma diagnosis—with a reported median diagnostic delay of 12 months.8,9 In clinical terms, a diagnosis of EATL, which carries a less than 20% five-year survival rate, may be postponed precisely because normal serology is misinterpreted as excluding severe pathology.10 Although the strength of this alarm signal rests largely on tertiary-center case series rather than population-based epidemiological data, and future registry studies are needed to establish population-level estimates, the clinical consequence of diagnostic delay—transition from potentially treatable to advanced metastatic lymphoma—justifies heightened vigilance. We therefore propose that persistent malabsorption with normal serology should trigger early enteroscopic reassessment with IEL immunophenotyping, positron emission tomography–computed tomography staging, and biopsy, rather than clinical reassurance alone.1,8,9

Age-stratified CD diagnostic algorithm with EATL warning signal.
Fig. 1  Age-stratified CD diagnostic algorithm with EATL warning signal.

Adapted from Mearin et al.5 and van Gils et al.7 CD, celiac disease; HLA-DQ2, human leukocyte antigen DQ2 haplotype; EATL, enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma; ESPGHAN, European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition; GIP, gluten immunogenic peptides; IEL, intraepithelial lymphocytes; IgA, immunoglobulin A; RCD-I, refractory celiac disease type I; RCD-II, refractory celiac disease type II; tTG-IgA, tissue transglutaminase IgA; TCR, T-cell receptor.

Finally, objective monitoring of dietary gluten exposure using gluten immunogenic peptides (GIP) represents a translational advance with direct relevance to the scenarios above. Among apparently adherent patients, inadvertent gluten exposure rates detected by urinary or fecal GIP range from 25% to 97%, explaining a substantial proportion of apparently non-responsive CD.11 GIP assays are particularly valuable in patients with seronegative or refractory disease, where conventional serology is uninformative, providing objective evidence of ongoing exposure before attributing mucosal injury to immune-mediated mechanisms. Incorporation of GIP monitoring into follow-up algorithms for non-responsive and RCD may help clinicians distinguish persistent exposure from true refractory disease—a distinction with major therapeutic implications. These additional diagnostic pitfalls are summarized in Table 1.3,6–9,11

Table 1

Additional diagnostic pitfalls in celiac disease

PitfallPrevalence/ContextPrognostic impactActionable test(s)Ref.
Pediatric seronegativity5–10% in children <5 years; concurrent infectionsGrowth failure, developmental delayHLA-DQ2/8 typing + serial tTG-IgA; IgA quantification3,6
RCD-II misclassification20–30% of refractory CD casesApproximately 50% 5-year EATL risk; poor survivalIEL flow cytometry (CD3+CD8− >30%), TCRγ clonality7,8
Seronegative EATL4–15% of RCD cases (tertiary-center series)<20% 5-year survival; median 12-month diagnostic delayPET-CT, double-balloon enteroscopy, IEL immunophenotyping8,9
Covert gluten exposure25–97% of apparently adherent patientsPersistent villous atrophy; mimics RCDUrine/stool gluten immunogenic peptides (GIP)11

In summary, we propose that integrating age-stratified pediatric pathways, mandatory RCD immunophenotypic subtyping, and a heightened index of suspicion for seronegative EATL would substantively extend the diagnostic framework proposed by Majmudar et al.1 The addition of GIP-based monitoring further addresses a practical gap in non-responsive disease surveillance. We believe such observations contribute constructively to ongoing refinements of CD diagnostic strategies.

Declarations

Acknowledgement

None.

Funding

None to declare.

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest related to this publication.

Authors’ contributions

Contributed to study concept and design (HR), data acquisition (HR), data analysis (HR), drafting of the manuscript (HR), critical revision of the manuscript (HR and NB), and supervision (NB). Both authors have made significant contributions to this study and have approved the final manuscript.

References

  1. Majmudar VH, Nguyen-Ngo K, Tadros M. Pitfalls in the Diagnosis of Celiac Disease: Bridging Gaps from Serology to Clinical Practice. J Transl Gastroenterol 2025;3(4):214-223 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  2. Singh P, Arora A, Strand TA, Leffler DA, Catassi C, Green PH, et al. Global Prevalence of Celiac Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;16(6):823-836.e2 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  3. Mpakosi A, Kaliouli-Antonopoulou C, Cholevas V, Cholevas S, Tzouvelekis I, Mironidou-Tzouveleki M, et al. Challenges in the Pediatric Celiac Disease Diagnosis: An Up-to-Date Review. Diagnostics (Basel) 2025;15(18):2392 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  4. Husby S, Koletzko S, Korponay-Szabó I, Kurppa K, Mearin ML, Ribes-Koninckx C, et al. European Society Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Guidelines for Diagnosing Coeliac Disease 2020. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2020;70(1):141-156 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  5. Mearin ML, Agardh D, Antunes H, Al-Toma A, Auricchio R, Castillejo G, et al. ESPGHAN Position Paper on Management and Follow-up of Children and Adolescents With Celiac Disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2022;75(3):369-386 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  6. Rahmoune H, Boutrid N, Amrane M, Bioud B. HLA genes as a predictive screening tool for celiac disease. Turk Pediatri Ars 2017;52(3):182-183 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  7. van Gils T, Nijeboer P, van Wanrooij RL, Bouma G, Mulder CJ. Mechanisms and management of refractory coeliac disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;12(10):572-579 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  8. Scarmozzino F, Pizzi M, Pelizzaro F, Angerilli V, Dei Tos AP, Piazza F, et al. Refractory celiac disease and its mimickers: a review on pathogenesis, clinical-pathological features and therapeutic challenges. Front Oncol 2023;13:1273305 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  9. Rajagopal A, Thompson CA, Chorzempa AK, Ryu AJ. Advanced enteropathy-associated T cell lymphoma (EATL) presenting with severe malabsorption and concomitantly diagnosed coeliac disease (CD). BMJ Case Rep 2023;16(12):e258265 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  10. Chandesris MO, Malamut G, Verkarre V, Meresse B, Macintyre E, Delarue R, et al. Enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma: a review on clinical presentation, diagnosis, therapeutic strategies and perspectives. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 2010;34(11):590-605 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  11. Coto L, Mendia I, Sousa C, Bai JC, Cebolla A. Determination of gluten immunogenic peptides for the management of the treatment adherence of celiac disease: A systematic review. World J Gastroenterol 2021;27(37):6306-6321 View Article PubMed/NCBI

About this Article

Cite this article
Rahmoune H, Boutrid N. Letter to the Editor: Celiac Disease Diagnosis Pitfalls — Pediatric Pathways, Refractory Stratification, and Seronegative EATL Risk. J Transl Gastroenterol. Published online: Apr 14, 2026. doi: 10.14218/JTG.2026.00005.
Copy Export to RIS Export to EndNote
Article History
Received Revised Accepted Published
February 27, 2026 March 21, 2026 April 1, 2026 April 14, 2026
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.14218/JTG.2026.00005