We read with interest the article by Abele et al that reported no
significant increase in antigliadin antibodies (AGA) in hereditary or
sporadic cerebellar ataxia. [1] Although the study found that the
prevalence of AGA positivity in both hereditary and sporadic cerebellar
ataxia was about double that in normal controls, the difference was not
statistically significant. Their results confirm our
findings of generally equal prevalence of AGA in hereditary and
sporadic ataxia. [2]
The difference between Abele’s finding and ours can be
explained by the type of patients screened. For example, they studied only
two patients with SCA2, both were AGA-negative. We screened five patients with
SCA 2 (from five different families) and all were AGA-positive. We have now
screened more patients with SCA2. Thus far, 60 % (12 of 20) SCA2 patients
were AGA-positive. This is significant when compared to 12% AGA positivity
(4/33) in normal volunteers (CI= 95, X2=13.5, p<0.001) (unpublished
results).
Other groups found similar results in SCA2 (S. Boesch, personal
communications). Hadjivassiou et al screened 268 ataxia patients
and found a significantly high prevalence of AGA only in sporadic
ataxia. [3] However, their sample of autosomal dominant ataxia contained
only three patients with SCA2, two with SCA6 and one with SCA7. Thus, it is
likely that only certain SCA types are associated with AGA positivity
which makes the comparison between different studies difficult as
different groups screened cohorts with different SCA types.
Further studies of larger number of ataxia patients are needed to
clarify the current discrepancies and to determine the prevalence of AGA
in different SCA types. Molecularly diagnosed hereditary ataxias are
likely to be the most revealing group to study. Sporadic ataxia cohorts
are likely to contain a mixture of various ataxia types with negative
family history including unlinked recessive hereditary ataxias, hereditary
ataxias with de novo mutations including false paternity. [4] High IgG or IgA
AGA in patients with sporadic ataxia should not be interpreted to indicate
that these patients have a distinct disease entity or “gluten ataxia”. [3,5]
The results of Abele and coworkers further show that AGA positivity
does not distinguish “gluten ataxia” from other ataxia types including
molecularly characterized hereditary ataxias.
References
1. Abele M, Schols L, Schwartz S, Klockgether T. Prevalence of
antigliadin antibodies in ataxia patients. Neurology 2003;60:1674-
1675.
2. Bushara KO, Goebel SU, Shill H, Goldfarb LG, Hallett M. Gluten
sensitivity in sporadic and hereditary cerebellar ataxia. Ann Neurol
2001;49:540-543.
3. Hadjivassiliou M, Grunewald R, Sharrack B, Sanders D, Lobo A,
Williamson C, et al. Gluten ataxia in perspective: epidemiology, genetic
susceptibility and clinical characteristics. Brain 2003;126(Pt 3):685-691.
4. Moseley ML, Benzow KA, Schut LJ, Bird TD, Gomez CM, Barkhaus PE, et al.
Incidence of dominant spinocerebellar and Friedreich triplet repeats among
361 ataxia families. Neurology 1998;51:1666-1671.
5. Hadjivassiliou M, Grunewald RA, Chattopadhyay AK, Davies-Jones GA,
Gibson A, Jarratt JA, et al. Clinical, radiological, neurophysiological,
and neuropathological characteristics of gluten ataxia. Lancet
1998;352:1582-1585.