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

Test Results


MerrillC1977

Recommended Posts

MerrillC1977 Apprentice

Hubby and I both got our IgA and IgG test results back over the last few days (see picture below).

Obviously, they both appear to be in normal ranges.

My question is: did we receive the same tests? (The "his" and "hers" don't seem to have the exact same wording/names, even though the blood draws took place labs run by the same medical system.)

PS - we were 98% gluten-free for no more than a week-and-a-half before the blood draws -- this shouldn't have caused any false negatives, correct?

Thank you!!

Results.webp


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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



mushroom Proficient

You are correct that you each received different tests. The doctor really should have run the full celiac panel for an accurate result (and you should have been eating gluten at the time of testing):

Anti-Gliadin (AGA) IgA

Anti-Gliadin (AGA) IgG

Anti-Endomysial (EMA) IgA

Anti-Tissue Transglutaminase (tTG) IgA

Deamidated Gliadin Peptide (DGP) IgA and IgG

Total Serum IgA

So you had the first and second tests (the least specific for celiac) and he had the fourth test (both the IgA and the IgG versions). I have no idea why this occurred unless the lab made a mistake and they were supposed to run all of them on both of you. Doctors have been trained that the tTG is the most specific for celiac, but really we are finding out that the newer DGP is the better test. Also, any IgA test is worthless unless they also run the last test, the total serum IgA, to make sure that you do in fact produce normal IgA antibodies. If this test is low it invalidates any IgA testing. He did at least run both the IgA and IgG versions of the tests, however, to cover that base, so that means that each of you had only one of the four possible tests for celiac (AGA, EMA, tTG and DGP. All in all, not a very satisfactory testing experience :(

MerrillC1977 Apprentice

Also, any IgA test is worthless unless they also run the last test, the total serum IgA, to make sure that you do in fact produce normal IgA antibodies. If this test is low it invalidates any IgA testing. He did at least run both the IgA and IgG versions of the tests, however, to cover that base, so that means that each of you had only one of the four possible tests for celiac...

So wait....just to clarify what you wrote: runing both the IgA and IgG versions of the tests covers the base of testing for normal IgA antibodies? Is that what you are saying here? Or are you saying that some other base was covered by running both the IgA and IgG versions of the tests?

mushroom Proficient

No what I said very poorly was that if you test low on the total serum IgA test then they need to run the IgG version of any test to get a valid result because you are not a normal IgA producer. The fact that he ran both IgA and IgG versions of a particular test means that the result was valid FOR THAT TEST. Sorry to confuse you. :)

MerrillC1977 Apprentice

No what I said very poorly was that if you test low on the total serum IgA test then they need to run the IgG version of any test to get a valid result because you are not a normal IgA producer. The fact that he ran both IgA and IgG versions of a particular test means that the result was valid FOR THAT TEST. Sorry to confuse you. :)

Thank you, and I apologize for being so confused in the first place. So, even though we each got a different set of tests....eact of our sets of tests was valid and probably reliable? (Because each separate set contained both the IgA and IgG versions of our particular tests?)

frieze Community Regular

Thank you, and I apologize for being so confused in the first place. So, even though we each got a different set of tests....eact of our sets of tests was valid and probably reliable? (Because each separate set contained both the IgA and IgG versions of our particular tests?)

BUT not valid because you weren't eating gluten at the time.

MerrillC1977 Apprentice

BUT not valid because you weren't eating gluten at the time.

I thought it was fine unless your gluten-free time extended many weeks or months? We were only gluten-free for *one* week/10 days maximum prior to testing, and not even 100% gluten-free at that.


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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



Skylark Collaborator

I thought it was fine unless your gluten-free time extended many weeks or months? We were only gluten-free for *one* week/10 days maximum prior to testing, and not even 100% gluten-free at that.

That wouldn't throw the tests off.

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. - nanny marley replied to wellthatsfun's topic in Post Diagnosis, Recovery & Treatment of Celiac Disease
      4

      nothing has changed

    2. - trents replied to Scott Adams's topic in Post Diagnosis, Recovery & Treatment of Celiac Disease
      46

      Supplements for those Diagnosed with Celiac Disease

    3. - trents replied to Woodster991's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      10

      Is it gluten?

    4. - RMJ replied to wellthatsfun's topic in Post Diagnosis, Recovery & Treatment of Celiac Disease
      4

      nothing has changed

    5. - asaT replied to wellthatsfun's topic in Post Diagnosis, Recovery & Treatment of Celiac Disease
      4

      nothing has changed

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      133,342
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Muhammad
    Newest Member
    Muhammad
    Joined
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.6k
    • Total Posts
      1m
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):
  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • nanny marley
      I agree there I've tryed this myself to prove I can't eat gluten or lactose and it sets me back for about a month till I have to go back to being very strict to settle again 
    • trents
      You may also need to supplement with B12 as this vitamin is also involved in iron assimilation and is often deficient in long-term undiagnosed celiac disease.
    • trents
      @par18, no, Scott's use of the term "false negative" is intentional and appropriate. The "total IGA" test is not a test used to diagnose celiac disease per se. The IGA immune spectrum response encompasses more than just celiac disease. So, "total IGA" refers to the whole pie, not just the celiac response part of it. But if the whole pie is deficient, the spectrum of components making it up will likely be also, including the celiac disease response spectrum. In other words, IGA deficiency may produce a tTG-IGA score that is negative that might have been positive had there not been IGA deficiency. So, the tTG-IGA negative score may be "false", i.e, inaccurate, aka, not to be trusted.
    • RMJ
      This may be the problem. Every time you eat gluten it is like giving a booster shot to your immune system, telling it to react and produce antibodies again.
    • asaT
      Scott, I am mostly asymptomatic. I was diagnosed based on high antibodies, low ferritin (3) and low vitamin D (10). I wasn't able to get in for the biopsy until 3 months after the blood test came back. I was supposed to keep eating gluten during this time. Well why would I continue doing something that I know to be harmful for 3 more months to just get this test? So I did quit gluten and had the biopsy. It was negative for celiacs. I continued gluten free with iron supps and my ferritin came back up to a reasonable, but not great level of around 30-35.  Could there be something else going on? Is there any reason why my antibodies would be high (>80) with a negative biopsy? could me intestines have healed that quickly (3 months)?  I'm having a hard time staying gluten free because I am asymptomatic and i'm wondering about that biopsy. I do have the celiacs gene, and all of the antibody tests have always come back high. I recently had them tested again. Still very high. I am gluten free mostly, but not totally. I will occasionally eat something with gluten, but try to keep to a minimum. It's really hard when the immediate consequences are nil.  with high antibodies, the gene, but a negative biopsy (after 3 months strict gluten-free), do i really have celiacs? please say no. lol. i think i know the answer.  Asa
×
×
  • 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.