Abstract
Celiac disease (CD) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by small intestinal inflammation triggered by gluten ingestion in genetically-predisposed individuals. A frequent extra-intestinal manifestation of CD is metabolic bone disease which contributes to an increased risk of fracture. The mechanisms underlying bone disease in CD remain incompletely understood, but multiple processes have been proposed including (1) malabsorption of calcium and vitamin D leading to secondary hyperparathyroidism and increased skeletal resorption, (2) pro-inflammatory cytokines altering the osteoprotegerin and receptor activator of nuclear kappa-B ligand ratio favoring osteoclastogenesis, (3) hypogonadism, and (4) low weight and malnutrition. Most studies show reduced bone mineral density in patients with CD. Bone microarchitecture is also deteriorated leading to reduced whole bone stiffness. Many, but not all investigations, have shown an increased risk of fracture associated with CD. The main stay of therapy for CD is maintaining a gluten-free diet. Improvement in bone mineral density with adherence to a gluten-free diet has been well-established. Bone mineral density remains lower, however, compared to controls and increased fracture risk can persist. There is no consensus on the timing of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry for bone mineral density assessment in patients with CD. Routine screening for CD in patients with osteoporosis is not recommended. Little data are available on the use or efficacy of prescription osteoporosis therapeutics in patients with CD. Studies are needed to develop standardized guidelines for screening and treatment of metabolic bone disease in patients with CD to identify those who may need early intervention with prescription osteoporosis therapy. Arch Endocrinol Metab. 2022;66(5):756-64
Keywords: Microarchitecture, gluten, fracture, bone density, inflammation
INTRODUCTION
Celiac disease (CD) is a systemic autoimmune disorder characterized by small intestinal inflammation triggered by gluten ingestion in genetically predisposed individuals. Gluten is a protein complex found in various grains including wheat, rye, and barley (1). Ingestion of gluten and its immunogenic fragment, gliadin, leads to an inflammatory cascade that may result in changes in gut permeability, production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, lymphocytic infiltration of the intestinal epithelium and ultimately villous atrophy (2,3). Similar to other autoimmune disorders, CD has a strong genetic component evidenced by familial clustering and high concordance in identical twins (4,5). Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) DQ2 and DQ8 haplotypes play a pivotal role in CD with 99% of CD patients carrying these alleles. HLA-DQ2/HLA-DQ8 is present in up to 30%-40% of the general population, however, only a minority of these patients have CD (1%-3%), suggesting additional factors contribute to the development of disease. Genome wide association studies have identified several non-HLA genes associated with CD (2,6). Environmental factors may be important as well.
CD is estimated to affect 1%-2% of the population worldwide with increasing incidence and prevalence over the last few decades (7–9). CD is more common in women than men (female:male ratio of 2:1 to 3:1). First- and second-degree relatives of patients with CD are at increased risk for developing the disease, with the highest risk in siblings, followed by offspring and parents (10). Patients can present at any age, but most typically present in the first two years of life or in the second to third decade. Classic intestinal symptoms of malabsorption including severe weight loss, chronic diarrhea, and failure to thrive are infrequent and are primarily seen in children. Adults can present with mild abdominal pain or bloating, but may be asymptomatic or have only extra-intestinal symptoms (11,12). The broad spectrum of CD disease and symptoms has been classified using the Oslo definitions of CD and CD-related terms (Table 1).
Table 1. Oslo Definitions for Celiac Disease and Celiac Disease-related terms (8).
| Classical | Signs and symptoms of malabsorption including failure to thrive, weight loss and diarrhea with or without steatorrhea |
| Non-classical | No signs or symptoms of malabsorption. Extra-intestinal manifestations including iron deficiency anemia, constipation, bloating, neurologic symptoms, abnormal liver biochemistry, infertility, delayed puberty, fatigue |
| Subclinical | CD below clinical detection threshold, no signs or symptoms sufficient to prompt routine CD testing |
| Symptomatic | Clinically evident gastrointestinal or extra-intestinal symptoms in patient with gluten intake |
| Asymptomatic | No gastrointestinal or extra-intestinal symptoms at time of diagnosis |
| Potential | Positive CD serology with normal small intestinal mucosa |
| Refractory | Recurrent or persistent symptoms and villous atrophy after 12 months of strict gluten free diet |
The preferred screening test for CD in adults following a gluten-containing diet is measurement of Immunoglobulin A (IgA)-tissue transglutaminase antibodies (tTG-IgA) with a concurrent IgA level. Serologic testing involves measurement of autoantibodies to tTG-IgA or anti-endomysial antibody (EMA-IgA) which target tissue transglutaminase, the autoantigen in CD. Deamidation of gliadin by the enzyme tTG enhances its immunogenicity via increased binding to HLA-DQ2/DQ8. EMA-IgA is highly specific for CD; however, it is not the first-line test due to high cost and operator dependency. Previously used “first generation” anti-gliadin antibody assays are no longer recommended due to their lower diagnostic accuracy. Patients with low IgA levels should have Immunoglobulin G (IgG)-based testing which includes tTG-IgG and deamiated gliadin peptide (DGP)-IgG, as IgA deficiency may lead to falsely negative tTG-IgA (13,14). All diagnostic testing should be done while patients are following a gluten-containing diet. The diagnosis can be established definitively in adults with positive serology by endoscopic evaluation and biopsy. Histologic changes are graded along a spectrum using the Marsh-Oberhuber classification. Duodenal biopsy with increased intraepithelial lymphocytes (Marsh I), crypt hyperplasia (Marsh II) and/or villous atrophy (Marsh III) in a patient with positive serology confirms the diagnosis of CD (15). HLA testing may be helpful in certain circumstances such as in those with discordant serology and histology, those who refuse endoscopy, those following a GFD with negative serologies or those at high risk.
The mainstay of treatment is lifelong adherence to a gluten-free-diet (GFD), which enables villous healing. There is currently no food and drug administration-approved medical therapy for CD, but several treatments are under investigation. These include several drugs in Phase II trials that address the inflammatory response, inhibit the TTG enzyme, as well as a vaccination aimed at desensitizing to gluten. Immune modulators include PRV-015, a monoclonal antibody targeting IL-15 which is thought to be a key factor in CD pathology, as well as TAK-101 (16), gliadin-encapsulated nanoparticles that induce immune tolerance to gluten. ZED1227 is a transglutaminase inhibitor and latiglutenase, is an enzyme which breaks down gluten, making it nontoxic in CD patients and can be supplemented with CD diet. Larazotide, a tight junction regulator which decreases intestinal permeability, was being studied in a Phase III trial that has been discontinued (17).
One of the most common extra-intestinal manifestations of CD is metabolic bone disease (MBD) which contributes to an increased risk of fracture in patients with CD (18–20). Many studies indicate that patients with CD, including those with asymptomatic disease (21), have lower bone mineral density (BMD) compared to age- and sex-matched controls (22,23). The reported prevalence of osteopenia or osteoporosis in CD is variable, ranging from 38%-72% of newly diagnosed patients (Table 2) (24–27). In a large cohort of patients with CD age 50 years and older, 44% had osteoporosis, indicating that this is a frequent and important issue for this population (28). This review will provide an overview on MBD related to CD in adults.
Table 2. Prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis in recent adult celiac disease cohorts.
| Author and Year of Publication | Study Design | Participants with CD | Osteoporosis+ (%) | Osteopenia (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valdimarsson (39), 1996* | Prospective | 63 | LS: 15% Hip: 18% FA: 22% |
|
| Meyer (42), 2001 | Cross-sectional | 128 (105/23) | LS: 38% FN: 27% FA: 36% |
LS: 38% FN: 44% RA: 32% |
| Galli (41), 2018 | Cross-sectional | 214 (153/61) Age: median (range) 38 (18.72) |
LS and/or FN: 17.8% | LS and/or FN: 42.5% |
| Ganji (24), 2019 | Meta-analysis | 563 | LS: 16.3% Hip: 13.3% LS and FN: 14.4% |
LS: 41.9% Hip: 46.9% LS and FN: 39.6% |
| Walker (28), 2020 | Cross-sectional | 721 (493/228) Age: mean (range) 43.6 (17-83) |
At spine, hip or forearm: 19.6% | At spine, hip or forearm: 43.3% |
| Sayar (25), 2021 | Cross-sectional | 100 (84/16) Age: Mean 34.6 years |
LS: 15.2% FN: 10.8% |
LS: 67.3% FN: 43.4% |
LS: lumbar spine; FN: femoral neck; RA: radius. *Authors use T-score < -2.0. + Based on T-score < -2.5
Pathophysiology of metabolic bone disease in celiac disease
The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying MBD in CD remain incompletely understood, but multiple processes have been proposed (Figure 1). Early in CD, villous atrophy and/or inflammation in the small intestine, the principal site for calcium and vitamin D absorption, is hypothesized to lead to malabsorption of these nutrients. In some patients, hypocalcemia and/or vitamin D deficiency may lead to secondary hyperparathyroidism and subsequent osteoclast-mediated bone turnover (29). Limited data suggest, up to 25% of patients develop secondary hyperparathyroidism and increased bone resorption (30,31). Despite a GFD, absorption of calcium may remain reduced. In one study, even four years after institution of a GFD, fractional absorption of calcium remained lower in patients with versus without CD (32). Osteomalacia, or impaired bone mineralization, is possible if malabsorption is prolonged. Limited information exists regarding the prevalence, but osteomalacia appears to be relatively rare among adults in the United State today. In one study of 103 patients, 21% had 25-hydroxyvitamin d levels less than 20 ng/mL and alkaline phosphatase (a possible indicator of osteomalacia) was elevated in about 10% of patients (33).
Figure 1. Schematic of potential pathophysiological mechanisms contributing to metabolic bone disease in celiac disease.
Inflammation is also thought to contribute to bone loss in CD (29). Pro-inflammatory cytokines may contribute to osteoclastogenesis via an imbalance in the receptor activator of nuclear kappa-B ligand (RANKL) pathway (34,35). Binding of RANKL to RANK on osteoclast precursors causes differentiation to mature osteoclasts and increases bone resorption. The ratio of osteoprotegerin (OPG), a decoy receptor blocking RANKL-RANK binding, and RANKL determines the degree of osteoclastogenesis. Inflammatory cytokines lower the ratio favoring osteoclastogenesis (36,37). Limited data suggest altered OPG/RANKL ratios in CD, with lower ratios associated with lower spinal BMD (38). Other potential contributors include hypogonadism, low weight and malnutrition. Low insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) may also play a role (28).
Effect of celiac disease on bone mineral density
Several studies evaluating BMD have shown reduced BMD in patients with CD, but there is significant heterogeneity in results due to varying methods of data collection, analysis of different skeletal sites, differences in age ranges included and duration of disease or GFD. A prospective study in 63 men and women found low forearm, trochanter, and spine BMD in 22%, 18% and 15% of patients, respectively (39). Pistorius and cols. found only reduced femoral neck (FN) BMD in pre-menopausal women with CD but low FN and spine BMD in post-menopausal women with CD (40). Galli and cols. found 60% of patients with CD had reduced BMD: 42.5% with osteopenia and 17.8% with osteoporosis. Age greater than 45 years, male gender and low weight was associated with osteoporosis (41). Other studies also found low BMD, particularly in men. Meyer and cols. reported osteoporosis in 34% of patients at the spine, 44% at the FN, 32% at the radius and found men were more severely affected than women when compared to age-matched controls (42). A large study found 5% of patients with CD had osteoporosis limited to the one-third radius (28). In men, the one-third radius was the most frequent site for osteoporosis, highlighting the importance of evaluating this skeletal site in this population. In this study, males were more likely to have osteoporosis, forearm osteoporosis and lower Z-scores at the spine and forearm compared to women (28). Further, greater degree of villous atrophy was associated with lower T-score and Z-score at the one-third radius. Patients with total versus partial atrophy were more likely to have osteoporosis at any site and were more likely to be male. This suggests lower BMD in men versus women may relate to greater severity of disease possibly related to delays in diagnosis, but this requires further study.
Skeletal microstructure in celiac disease
Few studies have investigated bone microarchitecture in CD. High resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HRpQCT) non-invasively measures volumetric bone density and skeletal microstructure, providing separate measures for trabecular and cortical bone. A study in 31 pre-menopausal women showed significant deterioration in trabecular and cortical indices in patients with CD versus controls. Radial trabecular density was 26% lower and trabeculae were thinner, fewer and more widely spaced. Cortical density was reduced by 4%. Similar findings were observed at the distal tibia. The microarchitectural deficits were greater in those with symptomatic compared to subclinical CD (43). A subsequent study confirmed these findings and also found reduced whole bone stiffness (a biomechanical indicator of strength, which is associated with fracture) measured by microfinite elemental analysis (FEA) compared to controls (44) (Figure 2). There is no comparable HRpQCT data in men with CD. Based on studies using DXA and HRpQCT, both the quantity and quality of bone appear to be affected by CD.
Figure 2. Representative HR-pQCT scan of a study participant with celiac disease illustrating trabecular defects and cortical thinning, adapted from Stein and cols. (44).
Fracture risk in celiac disease
As suggested by studies indicating reduced BMD, many, but not all investigations, have shown an increased risk of fracture associated with CD (Table 3). Vasquez and cols. found a high prevalence of peripheral skeletal fractures in patients with CD versus controls (25% vs. 8%) with a majority of fractures occurring at the wrist and forearm (20), while Ludvigsson and cols. found increased risk of hip fracture for up to 20 years after CD diagnosis (45). In contrast, studies from Denmark (46) and the UK (47) were not able to document an increased risk of fracture associated with CD and there was no difference in fracture risk before or after CD diagnosis. On the other hand, another study showed patients with CD had an increased relative risk of any fracture (30% increase), hip fracture (90% increase), and ulna or radius fracture (77% increase) but the increase in absolute risk was small (48). Symptomatic men and women with CD had significantly higher rates of fractures and risk of first peripheral fractures compared to controls and those with non-classical and subclinical CD in two studies (49,50). Importantly, patients presenting with gastrointestinal symptoms were found to have a higher risk of fracture than those without symptoms. Males with CD had a greater total number of fractures and younger age at the time of first fracture compared to women with CD (50). Meta-analyses support findings of increased fracture risk in patients with CD. One such analysis that included eight studies with over 20,000 patients found a 43% greater risk of fracture in patients with CD (51). Similarly a second meta-analysis indicated risk for any fracture and hip fracture were increased by 30% and 69% respectively in those with CD (52). Thus, the majority of data indicate fracture risk is increased in CD, and symptomatic patients as well as men may be most at risk.
Table 3. Selected studies of fracture risk in celiac disease.
| Author and Year of Publication | Study Design | Participants – CD (Female/Male) | Participants – Controls (Female/Male) | Fracture Outcomes | Adjusted OR/HR (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vasquez (20), 2000 | Case-control | 165 (143/22) Age: Mean (range) years 40 (16-74) |
165 (143/22) Age: Mean (range) year 41 (16-74) |
All Spine |
3.5 (1.8-7.2) 2.8 (0.7-11.5) |
| Vestergaard and Mosekilde (46), 2002 | Prospective case-control | 1021 CD (588/433) Age: Mean 31 years |
3063 (1764/1299) Age: Mean 31 years |
Any fracture before or after diagnosis | 0.70 (0.45-1.09) 0.94 (0.7-1.24) |
| Thomason (47), 2003 | Case-control | 244 (171/73) Age: Mean (range) years 60 (<55-75+) |
161 (115/46) Age: Mean (range) years 61 (<55-75+) |
Low trauma All Hip Forearm |
1.16 (0.65-2.10) 1.05 (0.68-1.62) 0.66 (0.05-9.50) 1.21 (0.66-2.25) |
| West (48), 2003 | Case-control | 4732 (3095/1637) Age: mean 43.5 years |
23,620 (18,545/5075) Age: mean 43.5 years |
All Hip Radius |
1.3 (1.16-1.46)
1.9 (1.20-3.02) 1.77 (1.35-2.34) |
| Moreno (49), 2004 | Case-control | Classical: 78 (62/16) Age: mean (range) 44 (18-77) NC/SC: 70 (55/15) Age: mean (range) 38 (17-81) |
296 (236/60) Age: mean 41 years |
All Classical CD NC/SC CD |
3.6 (1.7-7.5) 5.2 (2.8-9.8) 1.7 (0.7-4.4) |
| Ludvigsson (45), 2007 | Retrospective Cohort (adults and children) |
14,187 (8311/5876) Age: Median (range) 53 (0-93) |
68,952 (40,430/28,522) Age: Median (range) 53 (0-93) |
All Hip |
1.4 (1.3-3.5)
2.1 (1.8-2.4) |
| Olmos (51), 2008 | Meta-analysis | 23,955 | 96,777 | All | 1.43 (1.15-1.78) |
| Sanchez (50), 2011 | Case-control | 265 (223/42) Age: Median (range) 42 (18-85) |
530 (446/84) Age: median (range) 43 (16-87) |
Peripheral before CD diagnosis Peripheral after CD diagnosis |
1.78 (1.23-2.56) 1.28 (0.74-2.21) |
| Heikkila (52), 2015 | Meta-analysis | All Hip |
1.92 (1.29-2.84) 1.75 (0.78-3.89) |
NC: non-classical; SC: subclinical. Bold indicates statistically significant associations.
Bone mineral density response to treatment with a gluten-free diet
Improvement in BMD after strict adherence to a GFD has been well-established, however, BMD remains lower compared to disease-free controls and increased fracture risk can persist (39,53,54). Some studies indicate that BMD increases by 5%-8% on average with most improvement in BMD seen within the first one to three years of GFD initiation (55,56). There is, however, wide inter-individual variability. Predictors of BMD improvement remain to be elucidated. One study found that patients with lower baseline serum calcium had greater improvement in BMD suggesting those with the greatest calcium malabsorption had the greatest gains in BMD (33). Others suggest symptoms (56), age (57) and menopause status (53), may affect the response to a GFD. A few studies showed decreased fracture risk with adherence to a GFD (20,50), however, several other studies did not find a significant difference in fractures before and after GFD initiation (48). In a prospective study of >7,000 patients with biopsy-proven histologic evidence of CD who underwent repeat endoscopy, persistent villous atrophy (versus mucosal healing) was associated with an increased risk of hip fracture. These results indicate adherence to a GFD that allows for mucosal healing may reduce the risk of fracture. Given this data, patients should be counseled about the importance of GFD with regard to skeletal health (58).
Similarly, skeletal microstructure improves with adherence to a GFD. Using HRpQCT, improvement in both trabecular and cortical parameters were seen after one year of a GFD. The trabecular compartment had a greater increase compared to the cortical compartment (9% vs. 0.4% at the distal radius and 8% vs 1.5% at the distal tibia), primarily driven by trabecular thickness. This was hypothesized to be due to the higher remodeling rate in the trabecular compartment. Despite improvement, a majority of the bone parameters remained significantly lower compared to the healthy control group (59). Improvement in trabecular and cortical parameters was, however, maintained 3 years later (60).
BMD assessment in patients with celiac disease
There is no consensus on the timing of DXA for the assessment of BMD in patients with CD and guidelines vary by society. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry recommends BMD testing at diagnosis only in adults with classic malabsorptive symptoms (61). In contrast, the European Society for Study of Celiac Disease recommends BMD testing at time of diagnosis in all adult CD patients (62). The American Society of Gastroenterology does not recommend for or against BMD testing. A recent Canadian position statement suggests BMD assessment at diagnosis in patients with classic CD; however, in those with asymptomatic or subclinical CD, they suggest BMD be evaluated one year post-initiation of a GFD (63). Similarly, the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) recommends BMD assessment one year after GFD initiation in newly diagnosed CD patients (64), while the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) recommends BMD testing after one year of a GFD in patients above age 55 or those who have additional risk factors for osteoporosis (65). In patients with additional risk factors including post-menopausal status, age over 50 and history of fragility fracture, earlier screening has been suggested by some authorities. If osteoporosis or osteopenia is detected on an initial screening DXA scan, a follow up DXA scan is recommended in one year (63). In patients with normal baseline BMD, testing can be repeated in two to three years (63).
In some regions, implementation of these guidelines is suboptimal and DXA is under-utilized. For example, a retrospective study in the United States found only 36% of patients with CD in an outpatient tertiary referral center were appropriately referred for DXA as per AGA guidelines (66). On the other hand, in Australia, a recent study found that 82% of patients with CD were screened for low BMD (67). All patients with CD should be evaluated for vitamin D deficiency by measurement of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (63,68). Measurement of PTH can be considered based on clinical factors (such as severity of vitamin d deficiency, osteoporosis, presence of osteomalacia or hypocalcemia, etc.).
Testing for celiac disease in patients with osteoporosis
Routine screening for CD is not recommended in all adults with osteoporosis. The optimal approach is, however, unclear due to conflicting data. Stenson and cols. identified a higher prevalence of CD among post-menopausal women with osteoporosis (3.4%) compared to those without osteoporosis (0.2%) and recommended routine serologic screening for CD in all patients with osteoporosis (69). More recent studies, including a meta-analysis in over 3000 patients found only 1.6% of patients with osteoporosis have biopsy-proven CD (70), a rate comparable to that of the general population. This implies routine screening for CD in those with osteoporosis may be low yield, especially in patients without gastrointestinal symptoms (71,72). A Canadian multidisciplinary task force recommends an individualized approach especially in patients with gastrointestinal symptoms, those with a family history of CD, or when vitamin D insufficiency, low urinary calcium level or unexplained anemia are present (73). In contrast, there are some subgroups in whom the suspicion for CD is high and testing should be undertaken in such individuals. Pre-menopausal women and men below age 70 with osteoporosis, those with Z-scores two or more SD below age-matched controls, those with worsening osteoporosis despite therapy or without risk factors should be evaluated for secondary causes of osteoporosis, including CD (74).
Treatment of osteoporosis in patients with celiac disease
CD-associated bone demineralization and osteomalacia, if present, must be treated with initiation of a GFD and appropriate supplementation with calcium and vitamin D. However, as discussed above, initiation and maintenance of a GFD improves, but may not normalize, BMD. In post-menopausal women and older men with osteoporosis or fragility fractures, prescription therapy for osteoporosis should be considered while maintaining a GFD to reduce the risk of fracture. The optimal timing of prescription therapy after initiation of a GFD is unclear. Given BMD tends to increase in the first year following initiation of a GFD, it may be reasonable to delay therapy in many low risk patients with osteoporosis (particularly those who are young or without fracture) until 1 year after a GFD has been started and BMD has been reassessed. Clinicians should ensure 25-hydroxyvitmamin D levels are in the sufficient range, that osteomalacia and hypocalcemia are not present and calcium intake and absorption are adequate prior to initiation of medications for the treatment of osteoporosis (75). The AGA recommends initiating bisphosphonates in adults with celiac disease in the setting of osteoporosis, vertebral compression fractures or osteopenia with prolonged corticosteroid use.
Little data are available on the use or efficacy of prescription osteoporosis therapy in patients with CD. Parenteral, rather than oral, therapies may be preferable if absorption is a concern or gastrointestinal symptoms persist. Stuckey and cols. observed that 44% of patients with CD and low BMD or osteoporosis were prescribed osteoporosis therapy including alendronate, risedronate, zoledronic acid, raloxifene, strontium, denosumab and teriparatide. The most commonly utilized therapy was bisphosphonates (67). A randomized controlled trial in 28 osteopenic and osteoporotic patients with CD did not find a significant improvement in BMD with combination zoledronic acid and a GFD compared to a GFD alone, but was undoubtedly underpowered to detect such a difference (76). The most commonly reported side effects with oral bisphosphonates are gastrointestinal symptoms. Case reports, however, have described rare episodes of hypocalcemia in patients with CD being treated with bisphosphonates. Risk factors for hypocalcemia, including vitamin D deficiency, increased bone resorption, hyperparathyroidism and hypomagnesemia, are also commonly seen in untreated CD patients (77,78).
Summary and future directions
In conclusion, low BMD and osteoporosis are common in patients with CD and suggest that fracture risk is increased. The optimal approach to screening for MBD in patients with CD is unclear and recommendations from different societies are inconsistent. Not all societal guidelines endorse BMD testing in all adults with CD and testing is inconsistent in practice; as such, some at risk may fail to be identified. The foundation of addressing bone disease related to CD is initiation and adherence to a GFD and ensuring adequate calcium and vitamin D intake. Currently, very few studies have assessed which patients have the greatest increase in BMD after initiation of a GFD. Such data may assist with identification of those at risk for persistent bone disease if treated with a GFD alone. Lastly, men with CD may be particularly susceptible to bone loss and fracture, but limited data exist. Future studies are needed to develop standardized guidelines for the screening and treatment of bone disease in patients with CD in order to identify high risk patients who may need early intervention with osteoporosis therapy.
Footnotes
Funding: Endocrine Fellows Foundation Grant
REFERENCES
- 1.Fasano A, Catassi C. Clinical practice. Celiac disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(25):2419–2426. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp1113994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Caio G, Volta U, Sapone A, Leffler DA, De Giorgio R, Catassi C, et al. Celiac disease: a comprehensive current review. BMC Med. 2019;17(1):142–142. doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1380-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Lebwohl B, Sanders DS, Green PHR. Coeliac disease. Lancet. 2018;391(10115):70–81. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31796-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Fasano A, Berti I, Gerarduzzi T, Not T, Colletti RB, Drago S, et al. Prevalence of celiac disease in at-risk and not-at-risk groups in the United States: a large multicenter study. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(3):286–292. doi: 10.1001/archinte.163.3.286. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Nisticò L, Fagnani C, Coto I, Percopo S, Cotichini R, Limongelli MG, et al. Concordance, disease progression, and heritability of coeliac disease in Italian twins. Gut. 2006;55(6):803–808. doi: 10.1136/gut.2005.083964. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Dieli-Crimi R, Cenit MC, Nunez C. The genetics of celiac disease: A comprehensive review of clinical implications. J Autoimmun. 2015;64:26–41. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2015.07.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.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. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.06.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ludvigsson JF, Leffler DA, Bai JC, Biagi F, Fasano A, Green PH, et al. The Oslo definitions for coeliac disease and related terms. Gut. 2013;62(1):43–52. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.King JA, Jeong J, Underwood FE, Quan J, Panaccione N, Windsor JW, et al. Incidence of Celiac Disease Is Increasing Over Time: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020;115(4):507–525. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000523. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Singh P, Arora S, Lal S, Strand TA, Makharia GK. Risk of Celiac Disease in the First- and Second-Degree Relatives of Patients With Celiac Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(11):1539–1548. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2015.296. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Haere P, Hoie O, Lundin KEA, Haugeberg G. No major reduction in bone mineral density after long-term treatment of patients with Celiac Disease. Eur J Intern Med. 2019;68:23–29. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2019.07.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Micic D, Rao VL, Semrad CE. Celiac Disease and Its Role in the Development of Metabolic Bone Disease. J Clin Densitom. 2020;23(2):190–199. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2019.06.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.van der Windt DA, Jellema P, Mulder CJ, Kneepkens CM, van der Horst HE. Diagnostic testing for celiac disease among patients with abdominal symptoms: a systematic review. JAMA. 2010;303(17):1738–1746. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Husby S, Murray JA, Katzka DA. AGA Clinical Practice Update on Diagnosis and Monitoring of Celiac Disease-Changing Utility of Serology and Histologic Measures: Expert Review. Gastroenterology. 2019;156(4):885–889. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.12.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Hvas CL, Jensen MD, Reimer MC, Riis LB, Rumessen JJ, Skovbjerg H, et al. Celiac disease: diagnosis and treatment. Dan Med J. 2015;62(4):C5051. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kelly CP, Murray JA, Leffler DA, Getts DR, Bledsoe AC, Smithson G, et al. TAK-101 Nanoparticles Induce Gluten-Specific Tolerance in Celiac Disease: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study. Gastroenterology. 2021;161(1):66–80-e8. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.03.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Leichter I, Margulies JY, Weinreb A, Mizrahi J, Robin GC, Conforty B, et al. The relationship between bone density, mineral content, and mechanical strength in the femoral neck. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;(163):272–281. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Leffler DA, Green PH, Fasano A. Extraintestinal manifestations of coeliac disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;12(10):561–571. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2015.131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Bianchi ML, Bardella MT. Bone and celiac disease. Calcif Tissue Int. 2002;71(6):465–471. doi: 10.1007/s00223-001-2131-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Vasquez H, Mazure R, Gonzalez D, Flores D, Pedreira S, Niveloni S, et al. Risk of fractures in celiac disease patients: a cross-sectional, case-control study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95(1):183–189. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2000.01682.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Mazure R, Vazquez H, Gonzalez D, Mautalen C, Pedreira S, Boerr L, et al. Bone mineral affection in asymptomatic adult patients with celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;89(12):2130–2134. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Grace-Farfaglia P. Bones of contention: bone mineral density recovery in celiac disease--a systematic review. Nutrients. 2015;7(5):3347–3369. doi: 10.3390/nu7053347. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Kamycheva E, Goto T, Camargo CA., Jr Celiac disease is associated with reduced bone mineral density and increased FRAX scores in the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Osteoporos Int. 2017;28(3):781–790. doi: 10.1007/s00198-016-3791-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Ganji R, Moghbeli M, Sadeghi R, Bayat G, Ganji A. Prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia in men and premenopausal women with celiac disease: a systematic review. Nutr J. 2019;18(1):9–9. doi: 10.1186/s12937-019-0434-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Sayar S, Aykut H, Kaya Ö, Kürbüz K, Ak Ç, Gökçen P, et al. Bone Mineral Density Screening and the Frequency of Osteopenia/Osteoporosis in Turkish Adult Patients With Celiac Disease. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2021;32(7):600–607. doi: 10.5152/tjg.2021.20313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Larussa T, Suraci E, Nazionale I, Abenavoli L, Imeneo M, Luzza F. Bone mineralization in celiac disease. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012;2012:198025–198025. doi: 10.1155/2012/198025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Zanchetta MB, Longobardi V, Bai JC. Bone and Celiac Disease. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2016;14(2):43–48. doi: 10.1007/s11914-016-0304-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Walker MD, Williams J, Lewis SK, Bai JC, Lebwohl B, Green PHR. Measurement of Forearm Bone Density by Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Increases the Prevalence of Osteoporosis in Men With Celiac Disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;18(1):99–106. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.03.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Di Stefano M, Mengoli C, Bergonzi M, Corazza GR. Bone mass and mineral metabolism alterations in adult celiac disease: pathophysiology and clinical approach. Nutrients. 2013;5(11):4786–4799. doi: 10.3390/nu5114786. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Selby PL, Davies M, Adams JE, Mawer EB. Bone loss in celiac disease is related to secondary hyperparathyroidism. J Bone Miner Res. 1999;14(4):652–657. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.1999.14.4.652. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Valdimarsson T, Toss G, Lofman O, Strom M. Three years’ follow-up of bone density in adult coeliac disease: significance of secondary hyperparathyroidism. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2000;35(3):274–280. doi: 10.1080/003655200750024146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Pazianas M, Butcher GP, Subhani JM, Finch PJ, Ang L, Collins C, et al. Calcium absorption and bone mineral density in celiacs after long term treatment with gluten-free diet and adequate calcium intake. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16(1):56–63. doi: 10.1007/s00198-004-1641-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Zylberberg HM, Lebwohl B, RoyChoudhury A, Walker MD, Green PHR. Predictors of improvement in bone mineral density after celiac disease diagnosis. Endocrine. 2018;59(2):311–318. doi: 10.1007/s12020-017-1488-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Fornari MC, Pedreira S, Niveloni S, González D, Diez RA, Vázquez H, et al. Pre- and post-treatment serum levels of cytokines IL-1beta, IL-6, and IL-1 receptor antagonist in celiac disease. Are they related to the associated osteopenia? Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;93(3):413–418. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1998.00413.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Kontakou M, Przemioslo RT, Sturgess RP, Limb AG, Ciclitira PJ. Expression of tumour necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin-6, and interleukin-2 mRNA in the jejunum of patients with coeliac disease. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1995;30(5):456–463. doi: 10.3109/00365529509093307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Taranta A, Fortunati D, Longo M, Rucci N, Iacomino E, Aliberti F, et al. Imbalance of osteoclastogenesis-regulating factors in patients with celiac disease. J Bone Miner Res. 2004;19(7):1112–1121. doi: 10.1359/JBMR.040319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Khosla S. Minireview: the OPG/RANKL/RANK system. Endocrinology. 2001;142(12):5050–5055. doi: 10.1210/endo.142.12.8536. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Fiore CE, Pennisi P, Ferro G, Ximenes B, Privitelli L, Mangiafico RA, et al. Altered osteoprotegerin/RANKL ratio and low bone mineral density in celiac patients on long-term treatment with gluten-free diet. Horm Metab Res. 2006;38(6):417–422. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-944548. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Valdimarsson T, Lofman O, Toss G, Strom M. Reversal of osteopenia with diet in adult coeliac disease. Gut. 1996;38(3):322–327. doi: 10.1136/gut.38.3.322. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Pistorius LR, Sweidan WH, Purdie DW, Steel SA, Howey S, Bennett JR, et al. Coeliac disease and bone mineral density in adult female patients. Gut. 1995;37(5):639–642. doi: 10.1136/gut.37.5.639. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Galli G, Lahner E, Conti L, Esposito G, Sacchi MC, Annibale B. Risk factors associated with osteoporosis in a cohort of prospectively diagnosed adult coeliac patients. United European Gastroenterol J. 2018;6(8):1161–1168. doi: 10.1177/2050640618784340. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Meyer D, Stavropolous S, Diamond B, Shane E, Green PH. Osteoporosis in a North American adult population with celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96(1):112–119. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.03507.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Zanchetta MB, Costa F, Longobardi V, Longarini G, Mazure RM, Moreno ML, et al. Significant bone microarchitecture impairment in premenopausal women with active celiac disease. Bone. 2015;76:149–157. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2015.03.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Stein EM, Rogers H, Leib A, McMahon DJ, Young P, Nishiyama K, et al. Abnormal Skeletal Strength and Microarchitecture in Women With Celiac Disease. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(6):2347–2353. doi: 10.1210/jc.2015-1392. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Ludvigsson JF, Michaelsson K, Ekbom A, Montgomery SM. Coeliac disease and the risk of fractures - a general population-based cohort study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;25(3):273–285. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03203.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Vestergaard P, Mosekilde L. Fracture risk in patients with celiac Disease, Crohn’s disease, and ulcerative colitis: a nationwide follow-up study of 16,416 patients in Denmark. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156(1):1–10. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwf007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Thomason K, West J, Logan RF, Coupland C, Holmes GK. Fracture experience of patients with coeliac disease: a population based survey. Gut. 2003;52(4):518–522. doi: 10.1136/gut.52.4.518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.West J, Logan RF, Card TR, Smith C, Hubbard R. Fracture risk in people with celiac disease: a population-based cohort study. Gastroenterology. 2003;125(2):429–436. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5085(03)00891-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Moreno ML, Vazquez H, Mazure R, Smecuol E, Niveloni S, Pedreira S, et al. Stratification of bone fracture risk in patients with celiac disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;2(2):127–134. doi: 10.1016/s1542-3565(03)00320-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Sanchez MI, Mohaidle A, Baistrocchi A, Matoso D, Vázquez H, González A, et al. Risk of fracture in celiac disease: gender, dietary compliance, or both? World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17(25):3035–3042. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i25.3035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Olmos M, Antelo M, Vazquez H, Smecuol E, Maurino E, Bai JC. Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on the prevalence of fractures in coeliac disease. Dig Liver Dis. 2008;40(1):46–53. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2007.09.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Heikkila K, Pearce J, Maki M, Kaukinen K. Celiac disease and bone fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(1):25–34. doi: 10.1210/jc.2014-1858. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Bai JC, Gonzalez D, Mautalen C, Mazure R, Pedreira S, Vazquez H, et al. Long-term effect of gluten restriction on bone mineral density of patients with coeliac disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 1997;11(1):157–164. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2036.1997.112283000.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Corazza GR, Di Stefano M, Maurino E, Bai JC. Bones in coeliac disease: diagnosis and treatment. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2005;19(3):453–465. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2005.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.McFarlane XA, Bhalla AK, Robertson DA. Effect of a gluten free diet on osteopenia in adults with newly diagnosed coeliac disease. Gut. 1996;39(2):180–184. doi: 10.1136/gut.39.2.180. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Corazza GR, Di Sario A, Cecchetti L, Jorizzo RA, Di Stefano M, Minguzzi L, et al. Influence of pattern of clinical presentation and of gluten-free diet on bone mass and metabolism in adult coeliac disease. Bone. 1996;18(6):525–530. doi: 10.1016/8756-3282(96)00071-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Ciacci C, Maurelli L, Klain M, Savino G, Salvatore M, Mazzacca G, et al. Effects of dietary treatment on bone mineral density in adults with celiac disease: factors predicting response. Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;92(6):992–996. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Lebwohl B, Michaelsson K, Green PH, Ludvigsson JF. Persistent mucosal damage and risk of fracture in celiac disease. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(2):609–616. doi: 10.1210/jc.2013-3164. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Zanchetta MB, Longobardi V, Costa F, Longarini G, Mazure RM, Moreno ML, et al. Impaired Bone Microarchitecture Improves After One Year On Gluten-Free Diet: A Prospective Longitudinal HRpQCT Study in Women With Celiac Disease. J Bone Miner Res. 2017;32(1):135–142. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.2922. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Zanchetta MB, Costa AF, Longobardi V, Mazure R, Silveira F, Temprano MP, et al. Improved Bone Microarchitecture in Patients With Celiac Disease After 3 Years on a Gluten-Free Diet. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16(5):774–775. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.09.054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Kung AW, Wu CH, Itabashi A, Lee JK, Park HM, Zhao Y, et al. International Society for Clinical Densitometry official positions: Asia-Pacific Region consensus. J Clin Densitom. 2010;13(4):346–351. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2010.05.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Al-Toma A, Volta U, Auricchio R, Castillejo G, Sanders DS, Cellier C, et al. European Society for the Study of Coeliac Disease (ESsCD) guideline for coeliac disease and other gluten-related disorders. United European Gastroenterol J. 2019;7(5):583–613. doi: 10.1177/2050640619844125. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Fouda MA, Khan AA, Sultan MS, Rios LP, McAssey K, Armstrong D. Evaluation and management of skeletal health in celiac disease: position statement. Can J Gastroenterol. 2012;26(11):819–829. doi: 10.1155/2012/823648. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement: guidelines on osteoporosis in gastrointestinal diseases. Gastroenterology. 2003;124(3):791–794. doi: 10.1053/gast.2003.50107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Ludvigsson JF, Bai JC, Biagi F, Card TR, Ciacci C, Ciclitira PJ, et al. Diagnosis and management of adult coeliac disease: guidelines from the British Society of Gastroenterology. Gut. 2014;63(8):1210–1228. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-306578. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Singh P, Garber JJ. Implementation and adherence to osteoporosis screening guidelines among coeliac disease patients. Dig Liver Dis. 2016;48(12):1451–1456. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2016.08.121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Stuckey BGA, Mahoney LA, Dragovic S, Brown SJ. Celiac disease and bone health: is there a gap in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis? Climacteric. 2020;23(6):559–565. doi: 10.1080/13697137.2020.1816957. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Rubio-Tapia A, Hill ID, Kelly CP, Calderwood AH, Murray JA, American College of Gastroenterology ACG clinical guidelines: diagnosis and management of celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108(5):656–676. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2013.79. quiz 677. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Stenson WF, Newberry R, Lorenz R, Baldus C, Civitelli R. Increased prevalence of celiac disease and need for routine screening among patients with osteoporosis. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(4):393–399. doi: 10.1001/archinte.165.4.393. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Laszkowska M, Mahadev S, Sundström J, Lebwohl B, Green PHR, Michaelsson K, et al. Systematic review with meta-analysis: the prevalence of coeliac disease in patients with osteoporosis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2018;48(6):590–597. doi: 10.1111/apt.14911. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Legroux-Gerot I, Leloire O, Blanckaert F, Tonnel F, Grardel B, Ducrocq JL, et al. Screening for celiac disease in patients with osteoporosis. Joint Bone Spine. 2009;76(2):162–165. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2008.06.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Kavuncu V, Dundar U, Ciftci IH, Evcik D, Yigit I. Is there any requirement for celiac disease screening routinely in postmenapausal women with osteoporosis? Rheumatol Int. 2009;29(7):841–845. doi: 10.1007/s00296-008-0797-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Rios LP, Khan A, Sultan M, McAssey K, Fouda MA, Armstrong D. Approach to diagnosing celiac disease in patients with low bone mineral density or fragility fractures: multidisciplinary task force report. Can Fam Physician. 2013;59(10):1055–1061. e441-8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Becker C. Clinical evaluation for osteoporosis. Clin Geriatr Med. 2003;19(2):299–320. doi: 10.1016/s0749-0690(02)00068-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Weyman-Rzucidlo D, Ochelska B, Przedpelska G. [Value of consultation studies of problem sera in the diagnosis of syphilis] Przegl Dermatol. 1986;73(6):475–480. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Kumar M, Rastogi A, Bhadada SK, Bhansali A, Vaiphei K, Kochhar R. Effect of zoledronic acid on bone mineral density in patients of celiac disease: a prospective, randomized, pilot study. Indian J Med Res. 2013;138(6):882–887. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Dogru T, Sonmez A, Tasci I, Genc H. Symptomatic hypocalcemia due to oral risedronate therapy. Indian J Med Sci. 2005;59(12):542–543. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Meek SE, Nix K. Hypocalcemia after alendronate therapy in a patient with celiac disease. Endocr Pract. 2007;13(4):403–407. doi: 10.4158/EP.13.4.403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


