• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Lab Interpretation help pls? (Parvovirus B19 & C pneumoniae)

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
I just got these lab results in, another abnormal for me, yay!

Anyone familiar? Any links to related articles or interpretations for this type of thing?

1594147166183.png
 

Markus83

Senior Member
Messages
277
The results are quite useless. For chronic Chlamydia pn. infection you need to test IgA. IgM is nearly always negative in chronic cases and is only positive in primary infection. For Parvo I would use a Western Blot.
 

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
The results are quite useless. For chronic Chlamydia pn. infection you need to test IgA. IgM is nearly always negative in chronic cases and is only positive in primary infection. For Parvo I would use a Western Blot.

Well, the outline/roadmap of CFS says....

Chlamydia pneumoniae IgG antibodies. Dr Chia notes that most ME/CFS patients with active Cpn infection will have high IgG antibody levels (but IgM is negative); however some with this infection will have low IgG levels.1 Thus low IgG level do not necessarily mean you do not have an active Cpn infection.​
Cpn infection exists in two forms: in the initial phase, it is transmitted as an extracellular bacterium, and may cause flu-like attacks, separated by weeks of continual coughing, often resulting in chronic laryngitis. In the later stage Cpn changes to being an intracellular infection, which may be asymptomatic, persisting for life, or may give rise to symptoms.1
IgG tests: LabCorp, Quest. UK/EU: Medichecks, IMD.​

And it is the IgG test from LabCorp, with negative IgM and 8x high IgG. It seems important to me?
 

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
And it says the IgM is important here, and references LabCorp for the PV B19. Am I missing something?

Parvovirus B19 PCR and IgM antibodies. Dr John Chia diagnoses active infection when the PCR test is positive, or when there are high IgM antibodies.1
PCR tests: LabCorp, Quest. UK/EU: Medichecks, IMD.​
IgM tests: LabCorp, Quest. UK/EU: Medichecks, IMD.​
Note: acute parvovirus B19 infection can create false positive IgM results when testing EBV, cytomegalovirus, HHV-6, herpes simplex and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato and others.1 2 This is due to parvovirus B19 IgM antibodies cross-reacting with the IgM antibodies of these other infections.​
 

andyguitar

Moderator
Messages
6,595
Location
South east England
Your test results say "The result should not be used as a diagnostic procedure without confirmation of the diagnosis by another medically established diagnostic product or procedure"
 

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
Your test results say "The result should not be used as a diagnostic procedure without confirmation of the diagnosis by another medically established diagnostic product or procedure"
What, I thought you guys were guys were my confirmation. Don't sell yourself short andy!
 

Markus83

Senior Member
Messages
277
And it is the IgG test from LabCorp, with negative IgM and 8x high IgG. It seems important to me?
Unless you can overlook data from a lot of people (sick/healthy) you cannot judge if the IgG-titer is high or not; that's one of the problems. IgG positive is normal and most people have it. It seems that many labs in the US don't offer IgA testing for Cpn, I don't know why this is the case, but IgA is normally thougt as being a marker for chronic infection. Maybe Dr Chia doesn't use IgA because it's not offered in US labs? Or maybe he's not really a specialist for Chlamydia? I personally rely on IgA.
 

ljimbo423

Senior Member
Messages
4,705
Location
United States, New Hampshire
This info is from the Mayo Clinic-


Interpretation

IgG:

Chlamydophila pneumoniae

≥1:512

IgG endpoint titers of ≥1:512 are considered presumptive evidence of current infection.



<1:512 and ≥1:64

A single specimen endpoint titer of ≥1:64 and <1:512 should be considered evidence of infection at an undetermined time. A second specimen drawn 10 to 21 days after the original draw should be tested in parallel with the first. If the second specimen exhibits a titer ≥1:512 or a 4-fold increase over that of the initial specimen, current (acute) infection is indicated. Unchanging titers >1:64 and <1:512 suggest past infection.

https://microbiology.testcatalog.org/show/SCLAM
 

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
I'm asymptomatic, I def don't have an acute or current infection. But since I had the whole sore throat and sinus infections going on a few yrs ago, I'm worried it's a smoldering chronic infection.

IgG for C pneumoniae should decline w/ time.
 

ljimbo423

Senior Member
Messages
4,705
Location
United States, New Hampshire
This is one of the biggest problems with testing for chronic infections in my view. The type of testing and different levels of antibodies, read as positive or negative for reactivation's, vary GREATLY from lab to lab and doctor to doctor.

So how can I possibly know who is right? I suggest that most of the time I can't. Also people that are healthy and symptom free have these viral and bacterial reactivation's, as found by both high antibody levels and PCR. Which says that even if I do have one or many reactivation's, that doesn't mean they are causing any symptoms.


Standardizing Chlamydia Pneumoniae Assays: Recommendations From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA) and the Laboratory Centre for Disease Control (Canada)

Abstract
Chlamydia pneumoniae has been associated with atherosclerosis and several other chronic diseases, but reports from different laboratories are highly variable and "gold standards" are lacking, which has led to calls for more standardized approaches to diagnostic testing.

Using leading researchers in the field, we reviewed the available approaches to serological testing, culture, DNA amplification, and tissue diagnostics to make specific recommendations. With regard to serological testing, only use of microimmunofluorescence is recommended, standardized definitions for "acute infection" and "past exposure" are proposed, and the use of single immunoglobulin (Ig) G titers for determining acute infection and IgA for determining chronic infection are discouraged.

Confirmation of a positive culture result requires propagation of the isolate or confirmation by use of polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Four of 18 PCR assays described in published reports met the proposed validation criteria. More consistent use of control antibodies and tissues and improvement in skill at identifying staining artifacts are necessary to avoid false-positive results of immunohistochemical staining. These standards should be applied in future investigations and periodically modified as indicated.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11462186/
 

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
Also people that are healthy and symptom free have these viral and bacterial reactivation's, as found by both high antibody levels and PCR. Which says that even if I do have one or many reactivation's, that doesn't mean they are causing any symptoms.
Yea, well. I'm on a mission to clean up my body like 100%, even if it means clearing out some viral intruder w/ no apparent symptoms involved.

When you're finally clean, symptoms will be gone. If there not.. then you missed something.

All I know about testing (up to now) is that I have to find the best tests to spend my money on. Benchmark everything. And then I will keep re-testing for changes/improvements.

More than wanting better testing, what I really want is a website that shows how conditions and viruses are associated w/ one another. Co-morbid research. And Causative research. Like, a site that would tell me EVB is commonly connected/related/associated to HHV-6. Or, Hashimoto's is commonly associated with EBV, or with Psoriasis. Or CFS is commonly associated w/ enterovirus B, or EBV, or autoimmune conditions, etc.

That would be SO helpful!
 

ljimbo423

Senior Member
Messages
4,705
Location
United States, New Hampshire
More than wanting better testing, what I really want is a website that shows how conditions and viruses are associated w/ one another. Co-morbid research. And Causative research. Like, a site that would tell me EVB is commonly connected/related/associated to HHV-6. Or, Hashimoto's is commonly associated with EBV, or with Psoriasis. Or CFS is commonly associated w/ enterovirus B, or EBV, or autoimmune conditions, etc.

I hear you. Researching is very difficult, complicated, time consuming and often confusing!

In my experience if you keep looking and trust your gut, you will find the answers you are looking for. And they might be very different from the answers you thought you needed when you started looking.:thumbsup:
 
Last edited:

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
I hear you. Researching is very difficult, complicated, time consuming and often confusing!

In my experience if you keep looking and trust your gut, you will find the answers you are looking for. And they might be very different from the answers you though you needed when you started looking.:thumbsup:
That is a 100% for sure!! I look back and think it's funny what I first thought of as the "solution to my problems".

Luckily, I'm a Search Engine Optimization (SEO) by trade. So finding stuff is easier for me, thank Glob!

And I feel like the hours of research I put in today led me to a breakthrough of sorts. And I might look back and think "I was way off!". But I swear I'm so close!!

fyi - my "breakthrough" was deciding that it was the Enterovirus that triggered it all... for me. Prolonged stress period >> weaker intestinal mucosa barrier >> enterovirus finding a home, causing gut dysbiosis >> reservoir for viral persistence >> inflammation and tissue damage in the gut mucosa, Beta cells (β cells) infection and damage, immune dysfunction >> button pressed for all prison cell doors to open... and re-activation of dormant viruses >> me=tired
(added difficulty because I don't believe the chronic active enterovirus infection was directly causing fatigue at all)
 

ljimbo423

Senior Member
Messages
4,705
Location
United States, New Hampshire
And I feel like the hours of research I put in today led me to a breakthrough of sorts. And I might look back and think "I was way off!". But I swear I'm so close!!

I think you are getting closer!

my "breakthrough" was deciding that it was the Enterovirus that triggered it all... for me.

I think enterovirus' can trigger ME/CFS but are not an ongoing cause. I think they can cause lasting gut dysbiosis though.

Keep up the good work!
 

mitoMAN

Senior Member
Messages
625
Location
Germany/Austria
@ljimbo423 @Markus83
The results are quite useless. For chronic Chlamydia pn. infection you need to test IgA. IgM is nearly always negative in chronic cases and is only positive in primary infection. For Parvo I would use a Western Blot.

As I had only active (low) IgM Chlamydia Pneum last year, this would mean I had an primary active infection going on for the first time?

Chlamydia.JPG
 

Markus83

Senior Member
Messages
277
As I had only active (low) IgM Chlamydia Pneum last year, this would mean I had an primary active infection going on for the first time?
Maybe. But I think it's more likely a false positive. IgM is quite cross reactive and the titer is low. I would retest. If it was a primary infection you should now have IgM negative and IgG positive.
 

mitoMAN

Senior Member
Messages
625
Location
Germany/Austria
Very interesting. My IgG is negative this week! Still waiting on the IgM to see if its still active or even if it was a false at all!
 

sometexan84

Senior Member
Messages
1,229
As I had only active (low) IgM Chlamydia Pneum last year, this would mean I had an primary active infection going on for the first time?

All I've seen regarding your results is that acute primary infection is probably the case when positive IgM AND FOLLOWED BY positive or growing IgG weeks later. So like on a retest