Jump to content
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Interpreting Cyrex Array 3 results


tntntwins

Recommended Posts

tntntwins Newbie

how does one interpret this test? Ive got an equivocal under Native & Deamidated Gliadin 33 igG and an out of range under Omega Gliadin 17-mer-igG.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



cyclinglady Grand Master

Well....welcome to the forum!  Unfortunately, there is a lot of controversy as to whether the Cyrex test is helpful in diagnosing celiac disease and there is no known test for detecting Non-Celiac Gluten Intolerance or sensitivity.  You can read about it here a the University of Chicago's celiac website (leading U.S. researcher):

Open Original Shared Link

But, you can take your Cyrex test results to your medical doctor and ask to be tested for celiac disease.  The blood panel consists of TTG-IgA, TTG-IgG, DGP IgA, DGP, IgG, EMA and an IgA deficiency test (helps determine if the IgA tests actually work!)  Finally, an endoscopy obtaining at least six biopies is recommended. 

Search through the U of Chicago's website and check out the British and American Gastroentrologists organizations for proper protocol and diagnostic procedures.

Ask any questions as we are happy to help!

 

 

tntntwins Newbie

I went to your link. It didn't go into much depth and seemed like it was mostly talking about stool tests. What are your thoughts on Gluten Associated Cross Reactive Foods testing? I had this done as well.

cyclinglady Grand Master

No, the University of Chicago stated stool tests or otherwise:

"Why don’t you recognize tests (stool tests or otherwise) for non-celiac gluten sensitivity that are currently available through companies like Enterolab or Cyrex?

We only embrace tests that have endured rigorous scientific evaluations. So far, these tests have received no evidence-based support.

Enterolab has never successfully published anything on the accuracy of stool tests (nor have any other stool test manufacturers, to our knowledge) making it difficult to confirm the research results. Because of this, we must make our decisions based on what has been published; Harvard, UCSD, and the American College of Gastroenterology all agree that stool tests are simply not sensitive or specific enough methods in screening for celiac disease."

So, it is up to you to be your best health advocate.  I encourage you to research websites that are not selling something.  I stand behind my earlier statement that you should have celiac testing done by a medical doctor and those tests should be recognized and approved by medical organizations such as the American or British Gastroentology groups.  

Cross reactivity?  No one in the current celiac research world supports this to my knowledge (Neither do I).  

I encourage you to get tested for celiac disease.  The panel costs less than $450 and is usually covered by insurance.

I wish you well! 

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Celiac.com:
    Join eNewsletter
    Donate

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):
    Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):





    Celiac.com Sponsors (A17-M):




  • Recent Activity

    1. - Rogol72 replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      8

      Sainsbury's Free From White Sliced Bread - Now Egg Free - Completely Ruined It

    2. - Scott Adams replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      8

      Sainsbury's Free From White Sliced Bread - Now Egg Free - Completely Ruined It

    3. - Scott Adams replied to deanna1ynne's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      13

      Inconclusive results

    4. - deanna1ynne replied to deanna1ynne's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      13

      Inconclusive results


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      132,442
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Nony
    Newest Member
    Nony
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.5k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Rogol72
      @HAUS, I was at an event in the UK a few years back. I remember ringing the restaurant ahead to inquire about the gluten free options. All I wanted was a few gluten free sandwiches, which they provided and they were delicious. The gluten-free bread they used was Warbutons white bread and I remember mentioning it on this site before. No harm in trying it once. It's fortified with Calcium and Iron. https://www.warburtonsglutenfree.com/warbs_products/white-loaf/ The only other gluten-free bread that I've come across that is fortified is Schar with Iodized salt, nothing else.
    • Scott Adams
      In the U.S., most regular wheat breads are required to be enriched with certain B-vitamins and iron, but gluten-free breads are not required to be. Since many gluten-free products are not enriched, we usually encourage people with celiac disease to consider a multivitamin.  In the early 1900s, refined white flour replaced whole grains, and people began developing serious vitamin-deficiency diseases: Beriberi → caused by a lack of thiamin (vitamin B1) Pellagra → caused by a lack of niacin (vitamin B3) Anemia → linked to low iron and lack of folate By the 1930s–40s, these problems were common in the U.S., especially in poorer regions. Public-health officials responded by requiring wheat flour and the breads made from it to be “enriched” with thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, and iron. Folic acid was added later (1998) to prevent neural-tube birth defects. Why gluten-free bread isn’t required to be enriched? The U.S. enrichment standards were written specifically for wheat flour. Gluten-free breads use rice, tapioca, corn, sorghum, etc.—so they fall outside that rule—but they probably should be for the same reason wheat products are.
    • Scott Adams
      Keep in mind that there are drawbacks to a formal diagnosis, for example more expensive life and private health insurance, as well as possibly needing to disclose it on job applications. Normally I am in favor of the formal diagnosis process, but if you've already figured out that you can't tolerate gluten and will likely stay gluten-free anyway, I wanted to at least mention the possible negative sides of having a formal diagnosis. While I understand wanting a formal diagnosis, it sounds like she will likely remain gluten-free either way, even if she should test negative for celiac disease (Approximately 10x more people have non-celiac gluten sensitivity than have celiac disease, but there isn’t yet a test for NCGS. If her symptoms go away on a gluten-free diet, it would likely signal NCGS).        
    • JoJo0611
    • deanna1ynne
      Thank you all so much for your advice and thoughts. We ended up having another scope and more bloodwork last week. All serological markers continue to increase, and the doc who did the scope said there villous atrophy visible on the scope — but we just got the biopsy pathology report back, and all it says is, “Duodenal mucosa with patchy increased intraepithelial lymphocytes, preserved villous architecture, and patchy foveolar metaplasia,” which we are told is still inconclusive…  We will have her go gluten free again anyway, but how soon would you all test again, if at all? How valuable is an official dx in a situation like this?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

NOTICE: This site places This site places cookies on your device (Cookie settings). on your device. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.