Medical Forum / General / General / December 2004
Tb Test and BCG
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Sharon - 22 Nov 2004 18:40 GMT Hi:
I got my tb test last year, it was negative, I tested it again this year, the result is positive(borderline, adoptable), I checked my medical record, I got BCG vacinne when I came out of country 8 years ago, I am wondering if I have a inactive TB in my body or it is because I have BCG vaccine that my result is positive. Do I need to talk to my doctor about this?
Thanks for your help.
Sharon
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS - 22 Nov 2004 18:52 GMT > Hi: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Sharon I would definitely talk to your doctor about this. For that matter, I'd think an equivocal test would probably be an indication for another test. I received a BCG vaccine when I was 12, in 1965. This was in Brooklyn, NY. Years later I was required to get a ppd, and I told them not to bother--I'd been told I would have a lifetime positive for TB. They insisted though (this was for my residency) and was surprised to get a negative test.
Steve
 Signature Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS http://www.dentaltwins.com Brooklyn, NY 718-258-5001
David Rind - 22 Nov 2004 23:49 GMT > Hi: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Sharon This turns out to be a really complex question. You definitely want to talk to your doctor about this. There won't be any way to be certain whether the new positive PPD (TB test) is related to the old BCG vaccination or infection with TB, although evidence of TB infection on a chest x-ray would certainly be suggestive.
US recommendations, aimed mainly at protecting public health, would be to ignore the prior BCG in deciding how to interpret and deal with the positive PPD result, but those recommendations may or may not make sense for an individual.
 Signature David Rind drind@caregroup.harvard.edu
Sharon - 23 Nov 2004 07:01 GMT Thank you all for your reply. I went to get a x-ray, the result is normal. I am going to see a doctor next year, but the current nurse who did my tb test and checked my x-ray suggest that I do not need to see my doctor, she suggests me to do a TB test next year and see what result comes out,if it is negative, that is good, if it is positive, i will get a x-ray every year instead of geting a TB test in the following year.
> > Hi: > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > positive PPD result, but those recommendations may or may not make sense > for an individual. David Rind - 24 Nov 2004 01:20 GMT > Thank you all for your reply. I went to get a x-ray, the result is > normal. I am going to see a doctor next year, but the current nurse [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > will get a x-ray > every year instead of geting a TB test in the following year. This recommendation probably doesn't make sense. There is no reason for a TB test that was positive to turn negative a year later unless it is performed incorrectly (in which case it is a false negative). I would talk to your doctor before getting another TB test.
 Signature David Rind drind@caregroup.harvard.edu
Sharon - 24 Nov 2004 23:02 GMT Hi David:
Thanks for your replies. I am not a medical professional, but I do think what the nurse said make sense, from the all the related web articles, I think, if one has a BCG test long time ago, the effection will be reduced along the years, I was in the borderline(10mm) for this time while BCG has little effect, next year, the BCG effect will be reduced more, so at that time, it will make more sense to tell whether one has an inactive TB or because of BCG. I know American keep telling that BCG has no function to against TB, and BCG should not count to the TB result reading, but if I have inactive TB, where I got it, in the US? I came out of my country 8 years ago, I've never in close contact with any active TB patient through out my life.
Thanks, of course, I will go to my doctor soon.
Sharon
> > Thank you all for your reply. I went to get a x-ray, the result is > > normal. I am going to see a doctor next year, but the current nurse [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > performed incorrectly (in which case it is a false negative). I would > talk to your doctor before getting another TB test. David Rind - 25 Nov 2004 02:55 GMT > Hi David: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Sharon Just to reiterate: there's no reason to expect the PPD result to turn negative if it is rechecked next year. If the assumption is that the entire reaction was due to BCG, and that it went from negative in the past to positive now because it was "boosted" by a PPD test one year ago, it will likely have been booster still more by the PPD test this year. As a result, the reaction next year would be expected to be at least as large as the reaction this year and won't help distinguish latent TB from a BCG reaction.
I'm not arguing that you should necessarily blindly follow the US recommendation to ignore the BCG in interpreting a PPD result. Rather that this is complex and really worth talking to someone knowledgeable about. Issues like whether you might have been exposed (for instance whether you have friends and relatives who are also immigrants from somewhere where TB is prevalent) are part of what goes into thinking about this.
 Signature David Rind drind@caregroup.harvard.edu
Sharon - 25 Nov 2004 18:10 GMT Thanks for your reply.
I don't think my relatives has active TB. They did all get BCG when they came out of country. They all got throughly checkup when they went back. So there is no chance I got TB. And TB is a not prevalent diease in my country too.
> > Hi David: > > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > somewhere where TB is prevalent) are part of what goes into thinking > about this. forrest - 13 Dec 2004 03:58 GMT G'day David,
Yes Quantiferon-TB is indeed available in the United States. This original version of the Quantiferon test used the same PPD antigens as the skin test and therefore (albeit to a slightly lesser extent) will produce false positives to BCG vaccination.
The good news is that just last week the FDA approved Quantiferon-TB Gold, an updated version of the test that uses TB specific antigens (from the Rd1 region) that does not show false positive to the BCG vaccination.
Marketing of this new version of the test is expected to commence in the US shortly. It has been available in some other countries for some time.
Sharon - 23 Nov 2004 07:07 GMT While i am checking the website, I found that there is a saying: if you had a BCG within 5-10years, you will get a negative result first, then postive, is it true? Of course, it probably always depends on individules, I think. Thanks.
> > Hi: > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > positive PPD result, but those recommendations may or may not make sense > for an individual. David Rind - 24 Nov 2004 01:24 GMT > While i am checking the website, I found that there is a saying: if > you had a BCG within 5-10years, you will get a negative result first, > then postive, is it true? Of course, it probably always depends on > individules, I think. > Thanks. It is possible for that to occur as a result of something called the booster phenomenon. I don't think it is known how often this happens 5 to 10 years out from BCG vaccination, but this is part of what makes interpretation of these results tricky and why you would be best off talking with a doctor who understands these issues.
 Signature David Rind drind@caregroup.harvard.edu
Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com - 24 Nov 2004 23:54 GMT > Hi: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Sharon COMMENT:
Though BCG can cause a false positive in the PPD TB test, generally the test is done anyway, unless the BCG is very recent (1 year), since it usually takes a very recent BCG to give the clear false positive. In your case, it's been so long it's almost certainly not going to happen. The most severe reactions on the PPD (10 mm and certainly more than 15 mm) are generally considered to be due to TB and never BCG. The real interpretive problems are in people with BCG from a year or so ago with intermediate reactions of 5 mm to 10 mm. Those are people who in the past had to get X-rayed and re-tested, and sometimes even treated with INH presumptively.
Fortunately, there's recently been approved now a nice blood test for latent TB, which has controls for M. Avium and for BCG, so you can answer this question for certain if you have a skin test in the intermediate zone, and the question of BCG false positives becomes a problem. It's called QuantiFERON. Check out.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5202a2.htm
I hope with the availability of the new blood test, we can at last now start considering mass BGC vaccination in the US (which other than Holland is the only Western country without a population vaccination program for TB). Mostly it's the problem of false positives and inertia which has held it up in the US. BCG is not a perfect vaccine, and there's even some question if it prevents much pulmonary TB. However, it does do some good, and the good is mounting as TB becomes nastier. BCG does appear to decrease the multi-organ dissemination of TB, and because it's an immune treatment, there's no doubt as protective against dissemination from multi-drug resistant TB as any other kind of TB. So if you ever get 5-drug or 6-drug resistant strain of TB, you're gunna wish you had had it. That stuff spreading in your bone marrow and lymph nodes might as well be AIDS. Or worse, because we have a number of drugs that can slow down or hold most cases of HIV.
I've had my BGC, which I obtained from Organon about 10 years ago and did myself, somewhat clumsily (it works much better if you use an insulin needle to poke yourself very shallowly through the vaccine pool many times, rather than the silly magnet-and-tine-block set-up you get from Organon, if that's what they still ship). I had to do my own, because if you ask most US doctors about this, they won't know what the devil you're talking about and will probably never have done a TB vaccination. You can, however, get the TICE BCG even here in the US, since it's approved for health care workers, but frowned upon and not talked about, almost like it was a social stigma. My forearm had a nasty sore for a month. But I have no scar now. Probably my immune system will have some memory left if I should come across the real bug. Just because your skin test goes back to "normal" doesn't necessarily mean all your lymphocytes have forgotten everything. I'm convinced that traces of immunity are left from every vaccine and infection you ever had.
SBH
David Rind - 25 Nov 2004 03:03 GMT Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com wrote:
> Fortunately, there's recently been approved now a nice blood test for > latent TB, which has controls for M. Avium and for BCG, so you can [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5202a2.htm Is this actually being marketed in the US? I've never seen it ordered.
 Signature David Rind drind@caregroup.harvard.edu
|
|
|