Is Atypical CF really all that uncommon?

LouLou

New member
No wonder this is so confusing to people. That cf centers would call Buckeye's son's case A-typical and my son's case A-typical just goes to show you that A-typical is just that not usual or the same. They couldn't have more opposite cases really...Buckeye's with all the symptoms but no mutations and Isaac's with 2 mutations but no symptoms. I should be fair the clinic did not say to definitively call it A-typical. They couldn't diagnose him with cf (see criteria below) and therefore told me to call it what I wanted. Half cf, A-typical cf were suggested. In our family we just refer to it as cf-presently assymptomatic. He is followed as a cf patient and does cf lung treatments that won't harm him even if he never becomes symptomatic. He does albuterol and uses the Respirtech Vest. When he gets a cough that lasts more than a couple days we treat it with antibiotics to prevent any damage. He gets all the tests cfers get at clinic appts to help all of us understand his case better.

I wanted to mention that I also used to bash the sweat test as old fashioned, worthless, yadda, yadda but after all OUR DISFUNCTION IS DUE TO OUR SCREWED UP CHLORIDE CHANNEL. Case in point with the Vertex drug, our symptoms would be greatly reduced if the chloride channel was functioning even partly.

I'm going to post the definition of cf diagnosis I referred to in a previous post of mine.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.rsmpress.co.uk/S43_2.pdf">Link</a>Here's a link to a good article on A-typical cf.

The definition for cf diagnosis according to a US consensus panel approach to diagnostic criteria for cystic fibrosis.

One or more clinical features consistant with CF:
- chronic sinopulmonary disease
- gastrointestional and nutritional abnormalities
- salt loss syndromes
- male urogenital abnormalities resulting in obstructive azoospermia.

OR
A history of CF in a sibling
OR
A positive newborn screening test

AND and increased sweat chloride concentration by pilocarpine iontophoresis on two or more occasions
- or identification of two CF mutations
- or demonstration of abnormal nasal epithelial ion transport.

I've been wanting to post this for a while. I'm glad I finally did. I hope it helps someone.
 

LouLou

New member
No wonder this is so confusing to people. That cf centers would call Buckeye's son's case A-typical and my son's case A-typical just goes to show you that A-typical is just that not usual or the same. They couldn't have more opposite cases really...Buckeye's with all the symptoms but no mutations and Isaac's with 2 mutations but no symptoms. I should be fair the clinic did not say to definitively call it A-typical. They couldn't diagnose him with cf (see criteria below) and therefore told me to call it what I wanted. Half cf, A-typical cf were suggested. In our family we just refer to it as cf-presently assymptomatic. He is followed as a cf patient and does cf lung treatments that won't harm him even if he never becomes symptomatic. He does albuterol and uses the Respirtech Vest. When he gets a cough that lasts more than a couple days we treat it with antibiotics to prevent any damage. He gets all the tests cfers get at clinic appts to help all of us understand his case better.

I wanted to mention that I also used to bash the sweat test as old fashioned, worthless, yadda, yadda but after all OUR DISFUNCTION IS DUE TO OUR SCREWED UP CHLORIDE CHANNEL. Case in point with the Vertex drug, our symptoms would be greatly reduced if the chloride channel was functioning even partly.

I'm going to post the definition of cf diagnosis I referred to in a previous post of mine.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.rsmpress.co.uk/S43_2.pdf">Link</a>Here's a link to a good article on A-typical cf.

The definition for cf diagnosis according to a US consensus panel approach to diagnostic criteria for cystic fibrosis.

One or more clinical features consistant with CF:
- chronic sinopulmonary disease
- gastrointestional and nutritional abnormalities
- salt loss syndromes
- male urogenital abnormalities resulting in obstructive azoospermia.

OR
A history of CF in a sibling
OR
A positive newborn screening test

AND and increased sweat chloride concentration by pilocarpine iontophoresis on two or more occasions
- or identification of two CF mutations
- or demonstration of abnormal nasal epithelial ion transport.

I've been wanting to post this for a while. I'm glad I finally did. I hope it helps someone.
 

LouLou

New member
No wonder this is so confusing to people. That cf centers would call Buckeye's son's case A-typical and my son's case A-typical just goes to show you that A-typical is just that not usual or the same. They couldn't have more opposite cases really...Buckeye's with all the symptoms but no mutations and Isaac's with 2 mutations but no symptoms. I should be fair the clinic did not say to definitively call it A-typical. They couldn't diagnose him with cf (see criteria below) and therefore told me to call it what I wanted. Half cf, A-typical cf were suggested. In our family we just refer to it as cf-presently assymptomatic. He is followed as a cf patient and does cf lung treatments that won't harm him even if he never becomes symptomatic. He does albuterol and uses the Respirtech Vest. When he gets a cough that lasts more than a couple days we treat it with antibiotics to prevent any damage. He gets all the tests cfers get at clinic appts to help all of us understand his case better.

I wanted to mention that I also used to bash the sweat test as old fashioned, worthless, yadda, yadda but after all OUR DISFUNCTION IS DUE TO OUR SCREWED UP CHLORIDE CHANNEL. Case in point with the Vertex drug, our symptoms would be greatly reduced if the chloride channel was functioning even partly.

I'm going to post the definition of cf diagnosis I referred to in a previous post of mine.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.rsmpress.co.uk/S43_2.pdf">Link</a>Here's a link to a good article on A-typical cf.

The definition for cf diagnosis according to a US consensus panel approach to diagnostic criteria for cystic fibrosis.

One or more clinical features consistant with CF:
- chronic sinopulmonary disease
- gastrointestional and nutritional abnormalities
- salt loss syndromes
- male urogenital abnormalities resulting in obstructive azoospermia.

OR
A history of CF in a sibling
OR
A positive newborn screening test

AND and increased sweat chloride concentration by pilocarpine iontophoresis on two or more occasions
- or identification of two CF mutations
- or demonstration of abnormal nasal epithelial ion transport.

I've been wanting to post this for a while. I'm glad I finally did. I hope it helps someone.
 

LouLou

New member
No wonder this is so confusing to people. That cf centers would call Buckeye's son's case A-typical and my son's case A-typical just goes to show you that A-typical is just that not usual or the same. They couldn't have more opposite cases really...Buckeye's with all the symptoms but no mutations and Isaac's with 2 mutations but no symptoms. I should be fair the clinic did not say to definitively call it A-typical. They couldn't diagnose him with cf (see criteria below) and therefore told me to call it what I wanted. Half cf, A-typical cf were suggested. In our family we just refer to it as cf-presently assymptomatic. He is followed as a cf patient and does cf lung treatments that won't harm him even if he never becomes symptomatic. He does albuterol and uses the Respirtech Vest. When he gets a cough that lasts more than a couple days we treat it with antibiotics to prevent any damage. He gets all the tests cfers get at clinic appts to help all of us understand his case better.

I wanted to mention that I also used to bash the sweat test as old fashioned, worthless, yadda, yadda but after all OUR DISFUNCTION IS DUE TO OUR SCREWED UP CHLORIDE CHANNEL. Case in point with the Vertex drug, our symptoms would be greatly reduced if the chloride channel was functioning even partly.

I'm going to post the definition of cf diagnosis I referred to in a previous post of mine.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.rsmpress.co.uk/S43_2.pdf">Link</a>Here's a link to a good article on A-typical cf.

The definition for cf diagnosis according to a US consensus panel approach to diagnostic criteria for cystic fibrosis.

One or more clinical features consistant with CF:
- chronic sinopulmonary disease
- gastrointestional and nutritional abnormalities
- salt loss syndromes
- male urogenital abnormalities resulting in obstructive azoospermia.

OR
A history of CF in a sibling
OR
A positive newborn screening test

AND and increased sweat chloride concentration by pilocarpine iontophoresis on two or more occasions
- or identification of two CF mutations
- or demonstration of abnormal nasal epithelial ion transport.

I've been wanting to post this for a while. I'm glad I finally did. I hope it helps someone.
 

LouLou

New member
No wonder this is so confusing to people. That cf centers would call Buckeye's son's case A-typical and my son's case A-typical just goes to show you that A-typical is just that not usual or the same. They couldn't have more opposite cases really...Buckeye's with all the symptoms but no mutations and Isaac's with 2 mutations but no symptoms. I should be fair the clinic did not say to definitively call it A-typical. They couldn't diagnose him with cf (see criteria below) and therefore told me to call it what I wanted. Half cf, A-typical cf were suggested. In our family we just refer to it as cf-presently assymptomatic. He is followed as a cf patient and does cf lung treatments that won't harm him even if he never becomes symptomatic. He does albuterol and uses the Respirtech Vest. When he gets a cough that lasts more than a couple days we treat it with antibiotics to prevent any damage. He gets all the tests cfers get at clinic appts to help all of us understand his case better.
<br />
<br />I wanted to mention that I also used to bash the sweat test as old fashioned, worthless, yadda, yadda but after all OUR DISFUNCTION IS DUE TO OUR SCREWED UP CHLORIDE CHANNEL. Case in point with the Vertex drug, our symptoms would be greatly reduced if the chloride channel was functioning even partly.
<br />
<br />I'm going to post the definition of cf diagnosis I referred to in a previous post of mine.
<br />
<br /><a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.rsmpress.co.uk/S43_2.pdf">Link</a>Here's a link to a good article on A-typical cf.
<br />
<br />The definition for cf diagnosis according to a US consensus panel approach to diagnostic criteria for cystic fibrosis.
<br />
<br />One or more clinical features consistant with CF:
<br />- chronic sinopulmonary disease
<br />- gastrointestional and nutritional abnormalities
<br />- salt loss syndromes
<br />- male urogenital abnormalities resulting in obstructive azoospermia.
<br />
<br />OR
<br />A history of CF in a sibling
<br />OR
<br />A positive newborn screening test
<br />
<br />AND and increased sweat chloride concentration by pilocarpine iontophoresis on two or more occasions
<br /> - or identification of two CF mutations
<br /> - or demonstration of abnormal nasal epithelial ion transport.
<br />
<br />I've been wanting to post this for a while. I'm glad I finally did. I hope it helps someone.
 

LouLou

New member
As you'll read in the article where the diagnosis definiton I quoted is mentioned you'll see multiple references to the consensus members knowing there are shortcomings to their definition but it's a starting point at least.
 

LouLou

New member
As you'll read in the article where the diagnosis definiton I quoted is mentioned you'll see multiple references to the consensus members knowing there are shortcomings to their definition but it's a starting point at least.
 

LouLou

New member
As you'll read in the article where the diagnosis definiton I quoted is mentioned you'll see multiple references to the consensus members knowing there are shortcomings to their definition but it's a starting point at least.
 

LouLou

New member
As you'll read in the article where the diagnosis definiton I quoted is mentioned you'll see multiple references to the consensus members knowing there are shortcomings to their definition but it's a starting point at least.
 

LouLou

New member
As you'll read in the article where the diagnosis definiton I quoted is mentioned you'll see multiple references to the consensus members knowing there are shortcomings to their definition but it's a starting point at least.
 

janddburke

New member
if 'atypical' refers to the symptoms rather than the disease then perhaps because of improving treatments we can all look forward to labeling our loved ones' CF as 'atypical' (whatever that means).
 

janddburke

New member
if 'atypical' refers to the symptoms rather than the disease then perhaps because of improving treatments we can all look forward to labeling our loved ones' CF as 'atypical' (whatever that means).
 

janddburke

New member
if 'atypical' refers to the symptoms rather than the disease then perhaps because of improving treatments we can all look forward to labeling our loved ones' CF as 'atypical' (whatever that means).
 

janddburke

New member
if 'atypical' refers to the symptoms rather than the disease then perhaps because of improving treatments we can all look forward to labeling our loved ones' CF as 'atypical' (whatever that means).
 

janddburke

New member
if 'atypical' refers to the symptoms rather than the disease then perhaps because of improving treatments we can all look forward to labeling our loved ones' CF as 'atypical' (whatever that means).
 
A

Aspiemom

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>JazzysMom</b></i>

Another mention here is some of our older diagnosed patients werent diagnosed due to ignorance in the medical field.



Yes they might not have had "severe" symptoms, but they had enough or frequent enough issues that CF should have at least been "ruled out" long before the dx was made.



CF can mimic many illnesses for awhile, but eventually you have to start wondering.......



I do agree with Amy overall in CF is CF. Some might have the "fortune" to ride freely longer then any one else, but eventually IMHO CF will catch up.



MAYBE with certain mutations it will take a lot longer, but its still progressive & none the less CF!</end quote></div>

<b>Wow, this thread was initiated the beginning of June and I somehow missed it until someone just commented. It's a great thread.

Mel, I so agree with what you said. I exhibited symptoms for so long and no doctors could ever figure out what was going on. I wasn't dx earlier basically because of the fault of the medical field!</b>

BonnieBaby said: <i>That term is used to. If you don't have it already, there is a book by Solvay Pharmaceuticals called Now That I Have CF and it is geared towards adult diagnosed cases. You can ask you clinic to get it for you. I think the medical info is a little bit outdated but it gives you a general idea of what can happen. It also addresses the issues unique to adult onset of the disease and adult diagnosis, like the emotional impact and financial considerations. I cried my way through parts of it but I felt SO much better to have my concerns addressed.</i>

<b>I found this to be an excellent book and highly recommend it.

It just drives me NUTS when people are so astonished that I have CF. I am nearing 50 and am overweight and people who DO know what CF is think all CFers are under 25yrs and skinny. People even doubt me and think I'm a hypochondriac, which is so irritating. I know they are just ignorant. Then people say "Oh, you must have a mild case." (Like I have a cold or something!) I tell them my PFT's are running 35-40% of the average person my age and I don't consider that mild. I agree, CF is CF.

BTW, Johns Hopkins told me in 2003 that 1 out of 1400 people have "ATypical" CF- and most don't know it. Not sure where they get that, but that's what I was told.

Again, great thread. Thanks. Sorry about the bold, but I'm trying to separate my comments from the quoted and couldn't figure out how to do a second Quote.</b>
 
A

Aspiemom

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>JazzysMom</b></i>

Another mention here is some of our older diagnosed patients werent diagnosed due to ignorance in the medical field.



Yes they might not have had "severe" symptoms, but they had enough or frequent enough issues that CF should have at least been "ruled out" long before the dx was made.



CF can mimic many illnesses for awhile, but eventually you have to start wondering.......



I do agree with Amy overall in CF is CF. Some might have the "fortune" to ride freely longer then any one else, but eventually IMHO CF will catch up.



MAYBE with certain mutations it will take a lot longer, but its still progressive & none the less CF!</end quote></div>

<b>Wow, this thread was initiated the beginning of June and I somehow missed it until someone just commented. It's a great thread.

Mel, I so agree with what you said. I exhibited symptoms for so long and no doctors could ever figure out what was going on. I wasn't dx earlier basically because of the fault of the medical field!</b>

BonnieBaby said: <i>That term is used to. If you don't have it already, there is a book by Solvay Pharmaceuticals called Now That I Have CF and it is geared towards adult diagnosed cases. You can ask you clinic to get it for you. I think the medical info is a little bit outdated but it gives you a general idea of what can happen. It also addresses the issues unique to adult onset of the disease and adult diagnosis, like the emotional impact and financial considerations. I cried my way through parts of it but I felt SO much better to have my concerns addressed.</i>

<b>I found this to be an excellent book and highly recommend it.

It just drives me NUTS when people are so astonished that I have CF. I am nearing 50 and am overweight and people who DO know what CF is think all CFers are under 25yrs and skinny. People even doubt me and think I'm a hypochondriac, which is so irritating. I know they are just ignorant. Then people say "Oh, you must have a mild case." (Like I have a cold or something!) I tell them my PFT's are running 35-40% of the average person my age and I don't consider that mild. I agree, CF is CF.

BTW, Johns Hopkins told me in 2003 that 1 out of 1400 people have "ATypical" CF- and most don't know it. Not sure where they get that, but that's what I was told.

Again, great thread. Thanks. Sorry about the bold, but I'm trying to separate my comments from the quoted and couldn't figure out how to do a second Quote.</b>
 
A

Aspiemom

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>JazzysMom</b></i>

Another mention here is some of our older diagnosed patients werent diagnosed due to ignorance in the medical field.



Yes they might not have had "severe" symptoms, but they had enough or frequent enough issues that CF should have at least been "ruled out" long before the dx was made.



CF can mimic many illnesses for awhile, but eventually you have to start wondering.......



I do agree with Amy overall in CF is CF. Some might have the "fortune" to ride freely longer then any one else, but eventually IMHO CF will catch up.



MAYBE with certain mutations it will take a lot longer, but its still progressive & none the less CF!</end quote></div>

<b>Wow, this thread was initiated the beginning of June and I somehow missed it until someone just commented. It's a great thread.

Mel, I so agree with what you said. I exhibited symptoms for so long and no doctors could ever figure out what was going on. I wasn't dx earlier basically because of the fault of the medical field!</b>

BonnieBaby said: <i>That term is used to. If you don't have it already, there is a book by Solvay Pharmaceuticals called Now That I Have CF and it is geared towards adult diagnosed cases. You can ask you clinic to get it for you. I think the medical info is a little bit outdated but it gives you a general idea of what can happen. It also addresses the issues unique to adult onset of the disease and adult diagnosis, like the emotional impact and financial considerations. I cried my way through parts of it but I felt SO much better to have my concerns addressed.</i>

<b>I found this to be an excellent book and highly recommend it.

It just drives me NUTS when people are so astonished that I have CF. I am nearing 50 and am overweight and people who DO know what CF is think all CFers are under 25yrs and skinny. People even doubt me and think I'm a hypochondriac, which is so irritating. I know they are just ignorant. Then people say "Oh, you must have a mild case." (Like I have a cold or something!) I tell them my PFT's are running 35-40% of the average person my age and I don't consider that mild. I agree, CF is CF.

BTW, Johns Hopkins told me in 2003 that 1 out of 1400 people have "ATypical" CF- and most don't know it. Not sure where they get that, but that's what I was told.

Again, great thread. Thanks. Sorry about the bold, but I'm trying to separate my comments from the quoted and couldn't figure out how to do a second Quote.</b>
 
A

Aspiemom

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>JazzysMom</b></i>

Another mention here is some of our older diagnosed patients werent diagnosed due to ignorance in the medical field.



Yes they might not have had "severe" symptoms, but they had enough or frequent enough issues that CF should have at least been "ruled out" long before the dx was made.



CF can mimic many illnesses for awhile, but eventually you have to start wondering.......



I do agree with Amy overall in CF is CF. Some might have the "fortune" to ride freely longer then any one else, but eventually IMHO CF will catch up.



MAYBE with certain mutations it will take a lot longer, but its still progressive & none the less CF!</end quote>

<b>Wow, this thread was initiated the beginning of June and I somehow missed it until someone just commented. It's a great thread.

Mel, I so agree with what you said. I exhibited symptoms for so long and no doctors could ever figure out what was going on. I wasn't dx earlier basically because of the fault of the medical field!</b>

BonnieBaby said: <i>That term is used to. If you don't have it already, there is a book by Solvay Pharmaceuticals called Now That I Have CF and it is geared towards adult diagnosed cases. You can ask you clinic to get it for you. I think the medical info is a little bit outdated but it gives you a general idea of what can happen. It also addresses the issues unique to adult onset of the disease and adult diagnosis, like the emotional impact and financial considerations. I cried my way through parts of it but I felt SO much better to have my concerns addressed.</i>

<b>I found this to be an excellent book and highly recommend it.

It just drives me NUTS when people are so astonished that I have CF. I am nearing 50 and am overweight and people who DO know what CF is think all CFers are under 25yrs and skinny. People even doubt me and think I'm a hypochondriac, which is so irritating. I know they are just ignorant. Then people say "Oh, you must have a mild case." (Like I have a cold or something!) I tell them my PFT's are running 35-40% of the average person my age and I don't consider that mild. I agree, CF is CF.

BTW, Johns Hopkins told me in 2003 that 1 out of 1400 people have "ATypical" CF- and most don't know it. Not sure where they get that, but that's what I was told.

Again, great thread. Thanks. Sorry about the bold, but I'm trying to separate my comments from the quoted and couldn't figure out how to do a second Quote.</b>
 
A

Aspiemom

Guest
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>JazzysMom</b></i>
<br />
<br />Another mention here is some of our older diagnosed patients werent diagnosed due to ignorance in the medical field.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Yes they might not have had "severe" symptoms, but they had enough or frequent enough issues that CF should have at least been "ruled out" long before the dx was made.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />CF can mimic many illnesses for awhile, but eventually you have to start wondering.......
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />I do agree with Amy overall in CF is CF. Some might have the "fortune" to ride freely longer then any one else, but eventually IMHO CF will catch up.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />MAYBE with certain mutations it will take a lot longer, but its still progressive & none the less CF!</end quote>
<br />
<br /><b>Wow, this thread was initiated the beginning of June and I somehow missed it until someone just commented. It's a great thread.
<br />
<br />Mel, I so agree with what you said. I exhibited symptoms for so long and no doctors could ever figure out what was going on. I wasn't dx earlier basically because of the fault of the medical field!</b>
<br />
<br />BonnieBaby said: <i>That term is used to. If you don't have it already, there is a book by Solvay Pharmaceuticals called Now That I Have CF and it is geared towards adult diagnosed cases. You can ask you clinic to get it for you. I think the medical info is a little bit outdated but it gives you a general idea of what can happen. It also addresses the issues unique to adult onset of the disease and adult diagnosis, like the emotional impact and financial considerations. I cried my way through parts of it but I felt SO much better to have my concerns addressed.</i>
<br />
<br /><b>I found this to be an excellent book and highly recommend it.
<br />
<br />It just drives me NUTS when people are so astonished that I have CF. I am nearing 50 and am overweight and people who DO know what CF is think all CFers are under 25yrs and skinny. People even doubt me and think I'm a hypochondriac, which is so irritating. I know they are just ignorant. Then people say "Oh, you must have a mild case." (Like I have a cold or something!) I tell them my PFT's are running 35-40% of the average person my age and I don't consider that mild. I agree, CF is CF.
<br />
<br />BTW, Johns Hopkins told me in 2003 that 1 out of 1400 people have "ATypical" CF- and most don't know it. Not sure where they get that, but that's what I was told.
<br />
<br />Again, great thread. Thanks. Sorry about the bold, but I'm trying to separate my comments from the quoted and couldn't figure out how to do a second Quote.</b>
<br />
<br />
 
Top