Home > Riviste > Minerva Gastroenterologica e Dietologica > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Gastroenterologica e Dietologica 2016 December;62(4) > Minerva Gastroenterologica e Dietologica 2016 December;62(4):275-80

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
Per abbonarsi PROMO
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti
Permessi
Per citare questo articolo

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES   

Minerva Gastroenterologica e Dietologica 2016 December;62(4):275-80

Copyright © 2016 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Celiac patients’ attitudes regarding novel therapies

Justin TOMAL 1, Diane MCKIERNAN 2, Stefano GUANDALINI 2, Carol E. SEMRAD 1, Sonia S. KUPFER 1

1 Section of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; 2 Section of Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA


PDF


BACKGROUND: The only current treatment for celiac disease (CD) is a gluten-free diet (GFD). Novel therapies are in development to supplement or replace a GFD. Knowledge of patients’ attitudes toward these therapies is limited. The aim of this study was to determine attitudes about novel therapies in securely diagnosed patients with CD on a GFD and to correlate factors associated with these attitudes.
METHODS: A survey was created with two scenarios: a novel therapy that protects against cross contamination while on a GFD and one that allows intentional gluten consumption. The survey also included the Celiac Dietary Adherence Test and the CD Quality of Life (QOL) surveys.
RESULTS: A total of 182/284 (64%) CD patients completed the survey. Significantly more respondents would take a novel therapy to protect against cross contamination compared with one that allows intentional gluten consumption (87% vs. 65%; P<0.001). This difference was significant among women but not men. In both scenarios, protection against bowel inflammation was significantly more important than symptom control, and side effects were more important than cost. For a novel therapy that would allow intentional gluten consumption, a one-time injection was preferred over a daily pill, and patients willing to take this therapy had significantly lower QOL scores.
CONCLUSIONS: CD patients on a GFD are interested in novel therapies. There were notable differences in attitudes by gender and QOL. Considering patient preferences, drugs with daily or less frequent dosing that protect against bowel inflammation from gluten cross contamination would be best accepted.

inizio pagina