72 weeks ?

[ADESI]

At my last visit to my g.i. he brought up extending my treatmnet to 72 weeks from 52 as a possibility since
I am tolerating my tx well. I am 31 weeks into it , first time around. I am able to work as long as I don't get
too physical (I am a contractor) but still have plenty of TX **** and I am really tired ,depressed ,and grouchy all
the time. wbc and rbc counts are way down.
I am 1a , stage 1 mild fibrosis , just over 1 million v.l. baseline ,cleared virus in 2nd month of TX and really think 52 weeks is enough-
was wondering if there was precedent for extending TX or welcome any input

[ADESI]

I did check out the studies you mentioned and I'm confused. Sanchez Tapias
and Teravic 4 seem to support prolonged treatment if you are not und by week 4.
While Berg Study seems to say 48 is enough. Am I reading it correctly?
I wasn't und until test @ week 8.
But then I am always confused w/ reading anything technical.

[nygirl7]

I treated for 72 weeks because I was NOT UND until somewhere after week 12 but before week 24. Even though it was just a count of 400...that made me NOT und.

There is no information to support doing treatment longer than 48 weeks if you have already reached UND by week 12.

These meds are extremely toxic and the longer you are on them the more time you are risking severe autoimmune problems.

52 weeks makes no sense in the universe. There is NOTHING to stand behind even extending treatment the four extra weeks you are saying. Stop at 48 and be done.

If you really want to understand google up the abstracts for the Sanchez Tapias study and the Berg Study and Teravic 4 and read all of that and it will make much more sense to you.

[frijole]

I linked back to your homepage and read that you said you have been undetectable sinde week 8.  Is that correct?  In this thread you said you were 1/1.  Given these two facts, I cannot see the benefit of 72 weeks.  Give me more information -- sensitivity of testing, reasoning of doctor, hemoglobin counts.   I am glad you are handling treatment well, but that, in itself, is not a good enough reason to extend.

friojle

[Trish77]

Well, these drugs are not candy necklaces we're taking. We risk the impact of the side effects during treatment and the potential impact of the drugs to our health in other ways  that can potentially be permanent. Depression is not fun.  I don't have depression yet and I keep watching out for it.  Just the same, the emotional impact of treatment has been harder on me than the physical ones.  To keep pumping these drugs into our bodies indefinitely without sound scientific basis is as reckless as shortening the treatment to an arbitrary amount without sound scienctific basis solely because we've cleared early, in my personal opinion.

Good luck with this decision.

Trish

[ADESI]

exactly as you've stated --- the doc is a little inexperienced @ this and if I wasn't doing
well I would probably find another. That is why this forum is so great.

[Trish77]

You are genotype 1a, stage 1, same as me.  You cleared within first two months, same as me, I was UND by 6 weeks at latest.  If I wasn't UND by 12 weeks, I knew before I even started treatment I'd go to 72 weeks.  That is not your situation or mine.

I'm *personally* not aware of any stats that support extending to 72 weeks with the stats as you've stated them.  

I'm wondering on what basis your doc wants to extend your treatment to 72 weeks?  On the basis that you're tolerating well and if 52 weeks is good, 72 weeks is better?  Is there additional information here?