Finally Have My Panel Test Results In Hand

[castor]

Okay, finally have the results of my blood panel in hand, even after looking at several others and reading how people read them... I still have no idea how to interpret this all that well.

I'm just going to type out the whole page....

Celiac Serology Profile

JLP

Endomys. Titer NEGATIVE

IgA 204 mg/dl Range: 70-400

TTG IgA 3 EU Range: 0-19

<20 EU = Negative

20-30 EU = Weakly Positive

>30 EU = Positive

Interp Data See Note

Interpretive Data:

Gliadin IgA 20-30 AU

Gliadin IgG 20-30 AU

20-30 AU = weak positive >30= positive

tTG IgA 20-30 EU (same as above, weak pos)

EMA Titer = or > 1:5

Interp Test: CELN

RESUTS INTERPRETATION:

The results do not support a diagnosis of Celiac disease. Celiac disease is very unlikely in a patient with an adequate IgA levels and on a gluten containing diet. Development of Celiac disease in the future cannot be ruled out

Tests performed by: SBMF - Central Lab, South Bend, IN 46601 CLIA#i5D0357169

----- From that they were just like, oh, you don't have Celiac, and are moving to ruling out other things...

From even just me looking at it, aren't the second set of numbers very suspect????? I don't know what those are compared to the top one they are basing things from it seems.

Any help reading this is GREATLY appreciated... and also what the heck to say to my doctor about it to get him to listen to me.

[Lisa]

I am not good at interpreting test, but perhaps this will help:

Table 1: Serologic tests for celiac disease--pitfalls

Serology

Comment

AGA

Relatively non-specific

Anti-EMA

Highest overall sensitivity and specificity, but poor sensitivity in patients with partial villous atrophy

Anti-tTG

Sensitivity and specificity not equivalent to anti-endomysial antibody, Less sensitive in partial villous atrophy

Total IgA

Screens for IgA deficiency. Often present if IgA deficient and one of the following present: IgG AGA, IgG anti-endomysial antibody, IgG anti-tTG

Open Original Shared Link

[mftnchn]

Castor,

Since there are still many people with false negative blood tests, I'd take the weak positives seriously in spite of being written off by your doctors/labs. Especially the ttg--which is pretty specific.

Certainly there is enough evidence there to suggest a dietary trial.

[ravenwoodglass]

Castor,

Since there are still many people with false negative blood tests, I'd take the weak positives seriously in spite of being written off by your doctors/labs. Especially the ttg--which is pretty specific.

Certainly there is enough evidence there to suggest a dietary trial.

I agree completely with this. In my own family we have members that tested only one point into the positive range and the doctors said the result wasn't high enough to diagnose. But they went gluten-free anyway. The difference in the way they felt and the resolution of problems not even thought to be related to celiac at the time was very postive. The doctors would most likely call them gluten intolerant rather than celiac because the levels were low but we reasoned that they would eventually get sick enough to be 'full blown' celiacs. We had one member who had an endo and the GI stated he found celiac related changes but not enough to call her a celiac as her villi were not totally destroyed yet. He told her she could continue to eat gluten and he would reendo yearly unti her villi were gone or that she could stop eating it and never get to that point. Which option sounds better to you?

[Rachel--24]

TTG IgA 3 EU

Unless I'm missing something it looks to me like the tTG is negative.

This is the reference range:

<20 EU = Negative

20-30 EU = Weakly Positive

>30 EU = Positive

Anything over 20 would be considered a weak positive but your result was not in that range.

[mftnchn]

Yes, Rachel. At the lower portion of the post is another result that puts both the gliadin and TTG at a weak positive. So if those are included in the results, I'd still worry about that weak positive. Its weird that it is posted in this way, almost as if it was run twice.

[Rachel--24]

Yes, Rachel. At the lower portion of the post is another result that puts both the gliadin and TTG at a weak positive. So if those are included in the results, I'd still worry about that weak positive. Its weird that it is posted in this way, almost as if it was run twice.

The lower portion contains the interpretive data.....not her results. Its just repeating the ranges and what they mean.

Her tTG result was 3....and that is shown in the first set of numbers she posted (along with the reference range).

The test was not run twice....she just posted all of the info on her labwork and the reference ranges are on there in two seperate areas (with her results and in the interpretive data).

I did not see any results for antigliadin IgA or antigliadin IgG so I'm not sure if those tests were included. The upper portion has her results for EMA, Total IgA and tTG.

Its confusing because some of the info is posted twice but from what I can understand the bottom portion is to help the doctor/patient interpret the results. Then the lab includes their interpretation of the results as well.