Decoding VL Labs Results

I'm finally looking at PCR results from before dosing started until the end of week 20.

First, the good news. VL at the final screening was 27,500,000. VL immediately before first tx dosing was 28,400,000. All numbers are IU/ml.

Day 4 - 514
Day 8 - 120
Day 15 - 29
Day 22 - UND, and UND since that test - to the end of week 20.

The results are described as follows:

HCV RNA PCR TaqMan-RUO-CL <30IU/ml, no HCV RNA detected

Which part of this statement is the critical piece - <30IU/ml or the No HCV RNA detected? I'm not sure if this result means that 30 was the maximum sensitivity of the test, or if nothing detected means that the levels were below the sensitivity of the assay. This has been described here before, but search won't find that thread!

All help appreciated. I think this is good news, but don't want to celebrate before I know that the sensitivity was better than 30IU/ml.

[jmjm530]

Congratulations! Appears you were non-detectible somewhere between weeks 2 and 3. The "30 IU/ml" appears to refer to the sensitivity of the test which is fairly sensitive. Glad things are working out so well.

All the best,

-- Jim

[crsrph]

that is interesting their recent press release said taqman of less than 10 and your report  says <30  and they give you a 29 on day 15 how did they get that if their test only went to 30  i know you are reading your results im wondering why they are giving out conflicting information i must be missunderstanding something again congrats on your UND i think you have it made chuck

[crsrph]

should have been I know that you are reading your results correctaly

[APKhaos]

The 29 test does seem a bit odd, which is why I asked the question.

I'm thinking that I read somewhere that TaqMan may increase sensitivity when there is some qualitative sign of RNA in the sample. If so, it seems that if no RNA was detected in the qualitative test, then the 30IU/ml sensitivity could have been the last scale step.

Seem to think someone posted something like this a while back, but its a little fuzzy now that I really need to know :-). I suspect it was HR that posted the details. I remember replying that he had explained it more clearly that anything I'd read before......and now I cant find the thread. Doh!

[APKhaos]

The 29 test does seem a bit odd, which is why I asked the question.

I'm thinking that I read somewhere that TaqMan may increase sensitivity when there is some qualitative sign of RNA in the sample. If so, it seems that if no RNA was detected in the qualitative test, then the 30IU/ml sensitivity could have been the last scale step.

Seem to think someone posted something like this a while back, but its a little fuzzy now that I really need to know :-). I suspect it was HR that posted the details. I remember replying that he had explained it more clearly that anything I'd read before......and now I cant find the thread. Doh!

[APKhaos]

The 29 test does seem a bit odd, which is why I asked the question.

I'm thinking that I read somewhere that TaqMan may increase sensitivity when there is some qualitative sign of RNA in the sample. If so, it seems that if no RNA was detected in the qualitative test, then the 30IU/ml sensitivity could have been the last scale step.

Seem to think someone posted something like this a while back, but its a little fuzzy now that I really need to know :-). I suspect it was HR that posted the details. I remember replying that he had explained it more clearly that anything I'd read before......and now I cant find the thread. Doh!

[APKhaos]

The 29 test does seem a bit odd, which is why I asked the question.

I'm thinking that I read somewhere that TaqMan may increase sensitivity when there is some qualitative sign of RNA in the sample. If so, it seems that if no RNA was detected in the qualitative test, then the 30IU/ml sensitivity could have been the last scale step.

Seem to think someone posted something like this a while back, but its a little fuzzy now that I really need to know :-). I suspect it was HR that posted the details. I remember replying that he had explained it more clearly that anything I'd read before......and now I cant find the thread. Doh!

[APKhaos]

Looks like everyone is seeing the multiple post bug.

[pln]

Congratulations! I should find out what arm I am in tomorrow, The 27th I should have my VL reports and we can compare. 2 more shots for you!!!!!!

[pln]

Congratulations! I should find out what arm I am in tomorrow, The 27th I should have my VL reports and we can compare. 2 more shots for you!!!!!!

[pln]

Congratulations! I should find out what arm I am in tomorrow, The 27th I should have my VL reports and we can compare. 2 more shots for you!!!!!!

[APKhaos]

The 29 test does seem a bit odd, which is why I asked the question.

I'm thinking that I read somewhere that TaqMan may increase sensitivity when there is some qualitative sign of RNA in the sample. If so, it seems that if no RNA was detected in the qualitative test, then the 30IU/ml sensitivity could have been the last scale step.

Seem to think someone posted something like this a while back, but its a little fuzzy now that I really need to know :-). I suspect it was HR that posted the details. I remember replying that he had explained it more clearly that anything I'd read before......and now I cant find the thread. Doh!

[APKhaos]

Ha! I post lab results after waiting 20 weeks, and the board goes out of service for a couple days. Just lucky, I guess.

[crsrph]

ever figure out why they gave you a 29 on day 30 or why they listed taqman of <10 on their study  when ours is taqman <30

[APKhaos]

Not yet. These questions are in the works. Not sure if I'll get a clear answer on the press release <10IU vs the trial <30IU.

We will soon be seeing more trial results, as people here get past the magic week 20. Will be good to see how everyone has done so far, which I hope will be good news all round.