See  LAB COMPARISON TABLE

The fundamental difference between the various hypersensitivity test methods lies in what is measured. There are tests that measure antibodies, tests that measure particle size or volume changes, and tests that directly measure live lymphocyte response.

Serology tests measure the physical presence and amount of an antibody or antibody sub-type. Examples of these tests include ELISA IgA, IgG, and IgG4 tests performed by labs such as Cyrex, Genova, MetaMetrix, and many others. Measurement of antibody reveals that at some time the immune system mounted a response. The same mechanism operates when we recover from infection and illness, and antibodies are formed.

Antibody tests such as IgG are imprecise because they are unable to distinguish between protective antibodies and those that are provoking reactions. As an example, consider someone who had chickenpox as a child and now has antibodies to chickenpox (although they do not currently have symptoms of the disease). The lack of differentiation between harmful and protective antibodies results in high rates of “false positive” reactions and ultimately makes it difficult for patients to comply with an avoidance program. Poor compliance, coupled with the fact other types of hypersensitivity (type III and type IV) are not detected with antibody tests, greatly limits the clinical outcomes seen with antibody tests such as IgG.

Other test methods measure markers, such as particle size or volume changes, which can be related to immune response. The weakness of these test methods is that immune response is not the only source of the markers being detected. For instance, in particle size testing, a machine is used to detect particles 10 microns or larger in size. The rationale for particle size as a marker of immune response is that reactive lymphocytes are 10 microns in size. However, reactive lymphocytes are not the only particles of that size. These devices have no way to distinguish reactive lymphocytes from platelet clumps, stacks of red cells, or granulocyte remnants, all which can be 10 microns or larger. A recent study by Hodsdon and Zwickey comparing two hypersensitivity test methods concluded that particle size testing has such poor reproducibility that results are essentially random and have no clinical value.

The Lymphocyte Response Assay (LRA) developed by Dr. Jaffe at ELISA/ACT Biotechnologies is the only test of delayed hypersensitivity that directly measures lymphocyte responses to the antigens being tested. By looking directly at the lymphocyte, rather than at some marker suggestive of an immune response, the LRA is uniquely able to identify the full range of delayed immune responses (reactive antibody, immune complex, and direct cell response).

A Window into the Immune System

The most common assaults that pose the greatest burden to our immune systems on a daily basis are remnants of incomplete digestion and environmental antigens that cause allergies or sensitivities. By identifying these antigens and eliminating these exposures, the immune burden can be reduced or eliminated, allowing the defense and repair systems to return to optimal function.

Pioneering methods of collection, transport, and ex-vivo cell culture give LRA tests unmatched accuracy, reproducibility, and clinical value. The LRA tests make it possible to examine your patient’s general immune system health by monitoring delayed hypersensitivity responses to as many as 504 common substances.  In addition, an optional treatment plan provides patients with nutrient and lifestyle recommendations to reverse repair deficit by restoring key nutrient levels needed to effectively rebuild, rehabilitate, and thrive. This approach has been clinically substantiated.