Lab results - looking for opinions [PLEASE READ 1ST POST]

It could be considered low, but honestly, that all depends on the reference range, the units used, and what’s actually happening with the patient clinically. Since in the US, CRP is most commonly measured in mg/L—where the standard normal is anything under 5 mg/L (unlike some other places where they use mg/dL and set the bar at dL)—that value of 7.4 mg/L is really just a very slight elevation. How and why it's elevated? That depends on a massive amount of variables. You absolutely have to sit down and ask your doctor about this.

Many thanks for the response; she claims the image itself is perfectly fine, though if you ask me, I find that hard to believe... Thank you once again (:

I’m looking for some insight on my father's recent labs—he's 78...
Tumor markers pulled:
CEA -> 11.5 ng/ml (normal < 5)
NSE -> 12.7 ng/ml (normal < 16.3)
CYFRA 21-1 -> 1.6 ng/ml (normal 3.3)

We're running these markers for a follow-up with his thoracic surgeon—they've been monitoring a lung shadow about 25 mm in diameter. It's been there since 2010 (11 years now), and over that time, it grew from 11 mm to 25 mm...
My dad doesn't smoke, and he isn't showing any cancer-related symptoms.
He does deal with long-term osteoarthritis (he's actually due for a hip replacement) and ankylosing spondylitis. He also has heart issues—survived a myocardial infarction back in 2010 (right when they first spotted this shadow).
Since we have to wait for the surgeon's appointment, can anyone tell me if this CEA elevation could be linked to his arthritis or spondylitis... or is it possible this lesion has finally started changing after all these years?

Thanks in advance!

Nicholas Johnson8 said:...Can someone please explain why we have to sit around waiting for the surgeon's follow-up? Is this elevated CEA marker just because of osteoarthritis or spondylitis, or has this lung lesion actually started changing or getting worse after 11 years?

Look, that CEA marker is completely non-specific. You can't just stare at one number and expect an answer. It’s impossible to tell if you're looking at simple inflammation or something much more serious based on that value alone. Honestly, it could be both.

shadowskipper47 said:I already had the electrophoresis and ultrasound done, and I turned in the 24-hour urine test. The results are included in the files I uploaded in my previous post.

Ma'am,

While a monoclonal protein was detected—which naturally raises concerns regarding potential multiple myeloma—nothing in the current work supports that diagnosis just yet. We have to wait for the full picture before drawing any final conclusions. Typically, bone marrow aspirate samples are sent off for cytogenetic testing, molecular techniques like fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), and immunophenotyping. It takes some time for those specific results to come back from the lab.

Donna Young58 said:Hi everyone,
I'd like some insight on my Androstenedione levels.
These hormone tests were taken on day 3 of my cycle. I have irregular cycles, some acne issues, and an ultrasound showed slightly microcystic ovaries. I'm in my mid-30s, generally healthy, and at a great weight.
The Androstenedione level is what worries me; it looks quite high. However, since my other androgen levels are within range, I'm genuinely unsure what such a spike signifies. Thanks.

Estradiol 142 pmol/L (ref 77-921)
LH 8.5 IU (ref 1.8 - 11.8)
FSH 6.8 IU (ref 3.0 - 8.1)
PRL 11.9 µg/L (ref 5.2 - 26.5)
Total Testosterone 1.3 nmol/L (ref 0.4 - 1.9)
Free Testosterone 14 pmol/L (ref 3.5 - 30)
Free T % 1.1% (0.5-8.0)
SHBG 71 nmol/L (20-155)
Androstenedione 21.4 nmol/L (1-12)
DHEAS 6.9 µmol/L (1-13)

Hello,

The androstenedione values are significantly elevated (anything north of 17.5 nmol/L is considered a significant elevation). This necessitates further investigation to rule out potential adrenal or ovarian tumors, though Polycystic Ovary Syndrome is actually the most frequent culprit.

Emily Ortiz27 said:I don't have the rest of the lab results handy right now, but based on what I've provided, could you give me an idea of what we might be looking at?
Just to add some context: the patient is female, overweight, and managing hypothyroidism with medication.

Ma'am,

We need to move quickly here. We have to rule out whether this is a metastatic process—specifically, cancer spreading from another organ to the liver.

Maria Fisher46 said:Hey there,

So, look—even though they found a monoclonal protein, which always gets everyone sweating about the possibility of multiple myeloma lurking in the background, nothing they’ve looked at so far points in that direction. That said, we can't really call it until we see the full picture. Usually, when they pull a bone marrow biopsy, they send it off for cytogenetic testing, molecular stuff like fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), and immunophenotyping. Those kinds of tests take a bit of time to process, so we just have to hang tight for the final results.

Thanks so much.

Maria Fisher46 said:Listen, lady,

The reason they're rushing the biopsy is because they absolutely have to rule out whether this is some kind of metastatic mess—you know, like cancer spreading from somewhere else straight into the liver.

Thanks a million,
Is there like a specific deadline for when this needs to happen? Because she’s already stuck on a waiting list...
We'd honestly just pay out of pocket to get it checked privately if it means speeding things up or if it's actually the smarter move.

Emily Ortiz27 said:Much appreciated.
Is there a specific timeframe you'd suggest for getting this done? She’s currently sitting on a waiting list...
We could always head to a private clinic if that would speed things up or if it's better to move quickly.

Ma'am,

The search needs to happen promptly. I'm not suggesting an ER visit—meaning weekends or holidays aren't necessary—but it should be handled as soon as possible.

Dear Nicholas Myers, or anyone else here who might have some insight, I would truly appreciate your perspective regarding my elevated white blood cell count
. For years, my levels have been slightly above the standard range—the norm goes up to 9.7, but mine usually sit between 11 and 13. During my checkup today, they hit 13.1, and my internist suggested I see a hematologist because of it. Is such an elevation actually cause for concern? Could there be any connection to the asthma I manage?

I also have another question: my labs show low iron, yet my doctor didn't mention it at all. My iron is at 9, while the normal range is 11 to 32; my Tibc is 45 compared to the usual 49 to 72, though my Uibc looks fine at 36 within the 25 to 54 range
.
Thank you so much for your help!

rustymason82 said:Dear Nicholas Myers or anyone else with medical expertise, I would truly appreciate your perspective regarding elevated white blood cell counts
. For several years now, my leukocyte levels have been slightly above the typical range; while the standard upper limit is 9.7, mine usually hover between 11 and 13. During a routine physical exam today, the count reached 13.1, prompting my internist to suggest a consultation with a hematologist. Should such an elevation be considered a cause for genuine concern? Furthermore, is it possible that this could be linked to the asthma I manage?

I also have a secondary inquiry concerning my lab results, which indicate low iron levels—a detail my doctor failed to mention entirely. My iron level is currently at 9, whereas the standard range is between 11 and 32; additionally, the Tibc is 45 compared to the expected 49 to 72, though the Uibc remains within the healthy parameters at 36, given the normal range of 25 to 54.

Thank you so much for your assistance!

Did they perform a differential blood count? And what about your ferritin levels?

If this differential blood count is what I think it is, then these results were recorded:
neutrophil granulocytes: 58.7% (normal range 44 to 72)
lymphocytes: 27.9% (normal range 20 to 46)
monocytes: 10.3% (normal range 2 to 12)
eosinophil granulocytes: 2.6% (up to 7)
basophil granulocytes: 0.5% (up to 1)
neutrophil granulocytes: 7.68 (elevated; normal 2.06 - 6.49)
lymphocytes: 3.65 (elevated; normal 1.19 - 3.35)
monocytes: 1.35 (elevated; normal 0.12 to 0.84)
eosinophil granulocytes: 0.34 (normal up to 0.43)
basophil granulocytes: 0.07 (normal up to 0.1)

Ferritin was not tested.

Dear Kimberly Morris,

Looking over your HLA typing results, I don't see any predisposition for systemic connective tissue diseases, such as lupus.

However, there is a strong genetic predisposition for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, along with a slightly lower predisposition for celiac disease.

Having these markers doesn't mean you'll develop any of them—it could be none, or it could be all three.

rustymason82 said:If this is the differential white blood cell count I think it is, then the results were:
neutrophils: 58.7% (normal range 44 to 72)
lymphocytes: 27.9% (normal range 20 to 46)
monocytes: 10.3% (normal range 2 to 12)
eosinophils: 2.6% (up to 7)
basophils: 0.5% (up to 1)
absolute neutrophil count: 7.68 (elevated, normal 2.06 - 6.49)
absolute lymphocyte count: 3.65 (elevated, normal 1.19 - 3.35)
absolute monocyte count: 1.35 (elevated, normal 0.12 to 0.84)
absolute eosinophil count: 0.34 (normal up to 0.43)
absolute basophil count: 0.07 (normal up to 0.1)

Ferritin wasn't tested.

Sir,

Regarding iron levels, interpreting them in isolation is impossible without seeing the full CBC and ferritin levels. You provided the CBC data, but since ferritin wasn't tested, we can't determine what these iron numbers actually mean.

As for the leukocytosis, the differential indicates it's primarily driven by neutrophilia and monocytosis. This specific pattern isn't unique to one thing—it could be anything from various infections (especially certain "exotic" ones) to inflammatory conditions or even medication side effects.

This needs clarification through further questioning and a thorough exam. To start, it would be wise to order a peripheral blood smear, along with an ESR, CRP, basic metabolic panel (if you haven't already), protein electrophoresis, immunoglobulins, and ferritin.

Maria Fisher46 said:Hey Kimberly Morris,

Looking over your HLA typing results, I don't see any red flags for systemic connective tissue diseases, which includes things like lupus.

However, I do see a pretty strong genetic predisposition for psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and maybe a slightly lower risk for celiac disease.

Just because those markers are there doesn't mean you'll actually get them—but then again, you could end up with all three.

Hey Dr. Nicholas Myers,

Thanks a ton for getting back to me!

Yeah, my grandfather had psoriasis, and my little brother does too.

So, here's what I'm wondering... if the HLA typing shows zero chance for lupus, does that actually mean I'm totally off the hook for it?

Hey Nicholas Myers, I’ve got a question for you.

You’ve seen my labs already—high sedimentation, CRP, fibrinogen, immunoglobulins... the whole works.

I went in for testing because my lips and nails have turned this crazy shade of blue. On top of all that, I deal with migraines, and just yesterday I got a prescription for an Ajovy injection to start using.

So, naturally, I spent the entire night obsessively reading the instructions for this stuff. It says it was only released back in 2019. They only tested it on about 2,500 patients, and those were people who *only* suffered from migraines. It explicitly states they didn't test it on anyone with heart or cardiovascular issues, so they don't recommend it for them.
How am I supposed to know if I have some underlying cardiovascular issue? I mean, my lips are turning blue, my blood pressure is swinging wildly, and my heart rate is spiking up to 150...

I'll just wait for the moderator's reply

If you're scared of a medication, don't take it. Simple as that.
Just saying you "did some research" isn't enough—what kind of research? What did you actually find?
A decent neurologist isn't going to prescribe something that's contraindicated for a specific group.

Amanda Castillo70 said:I’m basically just gonna steal this answer mod

Look, if you’re scared of a medication, you don't have to take it. Period.
It’s not enough to just say "I did some research." Like, what kind of research? What did you actually find?
A decent neurologist isn't going to prescribe something that's contraindicated for a specific group anyway.

Duh, I know I don't *have* to take it, but I am. It’s just not like I’m totally fine with it.

Dear Nicholas Myers, or really anyone here who actually knows their stuff.
I’ve been dealing with these headaches that I was convinced were stemming from my cervical spine, especially since my X-ray results seem to point in that direction.
A few weeks back, I actually collapsed while I was out in the sun; I didn't really come to until I’d managed to chug a good amount of water and get some sugar into my system, so I’m assuming dehydration played a part.

However, because there’s a history of brain tumors in my family, I went to see a doctor to be safe. They gave me referrals for an EEG, a color Doppler, and some background imaging, though I haven't made it to those appointments yet. I should probably mention that I work rotating shifts, so my sleep schedule is pretty much all over the place.

Here is the EEG report:
The baseline cerebral activity shows medium voltage at mixed alpha frequencies of 9-10 Hz up to 50 uV. Visual response is well-expressed.
During the recording, there were occasional slower activities of 5-6 Hz up to 75uV interposed frontocentrotemporally on the right side, while the left side remained unchanged.
The US Army protocols were not followed due to epidemiological measures.

Conclusion: The findings show mild dysrhythmia frontocentrotemporally on the right, without vulnerability during the provocation method used.

I’m looking for some perspective here because I’m honestly terrified this might be a tumor. My follow-up with the doctor is still a ways off since I need to gather all my other test results first, but I can't help worrying that I might have accidentally caught a glimpse of something serious on this EEG.