Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Why were samples weakly positive for IgG antibodies not tested for IgA antibodies?
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITOR
The relation of Chlamydia pneumoniae antibodies
to ischaemic heart disease reported by Strachan et al, and the
commentary on the paper, deserve comment.1 An association
is reported between IgA antibody at the start of the study and
prevalent ischaemic heart disease or subsequent death due to ischaemic
heart disease. Presumably, serum samples with an IgG antibody titre of
<1 in 16 were not tested for IgA antibody because it was thought that IgA antibody would not exist. Why, however, were 310 samples that were
weakly positive for IgG antibodies not tested for IgA antibodies? Surely some of these could have been weakly positive for IgA antibodies at 1 in 16 and so have influenced the interpretation of results?
Persistent IgA antibody is thought to indicate a chronic infection, as
is persistent IgG antibody. Conceptually, therefore, it is difficult to
understand why significance should apply apparently only to the
presence of IgA antibodies,