Aa
VL under 43
Is there any significance of numbers lower than other numbers as long as the VL is under 43 while txing (and after tx)?
In other words, is it better to have a 12 as opposed to a 35 or is it irrelevant under 43?
And how low can VL go ?
Thanks,
Bree
In other words, is it better to have a 12 as opposed to a 35 or is it irrelevant under 43?
And how low can VL go ?
Thanks,
Bree
If you work for labcorp I want a gift certificate for christmas.
Do they have a buy 10 and get the 11th quantasure for free punch card? even better then the frozen yogurt! LOL
Do they have a buy 10 and get the 11th quantasure for free punch card? even better then the frozen yogurt! LOL
....just don`t accuse me of working for LabCorp because I keep mentioning their test and I am happy!
....just kidding :-)
b
....just kidding :-)
b
"Where is jusjames when you need him"
I miss that little feisty fella. Hopefully he's just about ready to enter the land of SVR.
Hey jusjames, get your can on here and give us progress report.
I miss that little feisty fella. Hopefully he's just about ready to enter the land of SVR.
Hey jusjames, get your can on here and give us progress report.
"thanks Dave, and when do they like to see the 2 log drop by?"
I think that to even consider extending if you are not und a doc would like to see a two log drop by week 12. The probelm is that the standards are evolving all the time.
I read something either on the forum or on the internet that said that week 8 was as good a predictor of svr with soc as week 12.
With the pi's they now have ervr (extended rvr) at week 8, with boceprevir it makes sense to me because they don't introduce the boceprevir until the begging of week 5 after you have had a 4 week lead in of soc, so week eight is four weeks of triple therapy. Not sure why they use ervr with telaprevir since they start using triple therapy from day one.
I think once the docs get there hands on these drugs they will continue to evolve the treatment strategies, lead in or no lead in etc.
I think that to even consider extending if you are not und a doc would like to see a two log drop by week 12. The probelm is that the standards are evolving all the time.
I read something either on the forum or on the internet that said that week 8 was as good a predictor of svr with soc as week 12.
With the pi's they now have ervr (extended rvr) at week 8, with boceprevir it makes sense to me because they don't introduce the boceprevir until the begging of week 5 after you have had a 4 week lead in of soc, so week eight is four weeks of triple therapy. Not sure why they use ervr with telaprevir since they start using triple therapy from day one.
I think once the docs get there hands on these drugs they will continue to evolve the treatment strategies, lead in or no lead in etc.
"I want to be as UND as possible at ALL times
and for that only the most sensitive test available
will do.
Right now that is LabCorp NGI QuantaSure and UltraQual."
Where is jusjames when you need him! LOL
(just kidding Bali)
and for that only the most sensitive test available
will do.
Right now that is LabCorp NGI QuantaSure and UltraQual."
Where is jusjames when you need him! LOL
(just kidding Bali)
I want to be as UND as possible at ALL times
and for that only the most sensitive test available
will do.
Right now that is LabCorp NGI QuantaSure and UltraQual.
b
and for that only the most sensitive test available
will do.
Right now that is LabCorp NGI QuantaSure and UltraQual.
b
treating with soc: rvr is und by week 4, evr is und by week 12
Treating with boceprevir or telaprevir: rvr is und by week 8, ever is und by week 12
Many doctor stop treatment at week 12 these days if not und. It's very individual of course and a the stage of your disease would play a large part in continuing treatment and likely extending treatment time if you are not und by week 12.
I believe the same is true for all genotypes, but only sure about geno 1
- Dave
Treating with boceprevir or telaprevir: rvr is und by week 8, ever is und by week 12
Many doctor stop treatment at week 12 these days if not und. It's very individual of course and a the stage of your disease would play a large part in continuing treatment and likely extending treatment time if you are not und by week 12.
I believe the same is true for all genotypes, but only sure about geno 1
- Dave
Is this still the criteria for treatment for 1's?
(UND by 24, 2log by week 12)
What about 2's and 3's?
What is the definition of
Early responder and Rapid responder as in how many weeks to go UND for these?
(UND by 24, 2log by week 12)
What about 2's and 3's?
What is the definition of
Early responder and Rapid responder as in how many weeks to go UND for these?
As I mentioned before you are most likely und already. 55 at week 2 is a phenomenal response.
"And can one little drop of virus really hide out anywhere like in your toe? "
The virus "hides out" in your blood stream, however it's home is your liver. Hep C attacks the liver exclusively, everything else is sides from that attack. Allow me to piggyback on your post and ask a couple questions ..
HCV is created in the liver?
Is there a life cycle for any individual virus, like for platelets?
Thanks
The virus "hides out" in your blood stream, however it's home is your liver. Hep C attacks the liver exclusively, everything else is sides from that attack. Allow me to piggyback on your post and ask a couple questions ..
HCV is created in the liver?
Is there a life cycle for any individual virus, like for platelets?
Thanks
I had the requisite two log drop by week 12 (actually had it at week 4 with my first test and thought things were just jake but then that lousy 400+ wouldn't go away. Sometimes this happens when you have a low starting out VL for some reason (568k or was it 468k jez my brain is not working today - no matter close enough).
I extended because I met the critera (UND by 24, 2log by week 12) and the Berg Study and the Sanchez Tapias study provided data that it would increase my chances. If I had not had met those marks at week 24 I would have stopped and then waited and started treatment all over from the beginning (probably with Infergen as I was already almost double dosing the riba and some days the interferon too so I really couldn't have added more meds or anything and at the time Telapravir was in early early stages of development...Infergen would have been what my doctor would have most likely done).
As you can see in just a few short years things have changed DRASTICALLY giving heppers so many more options. It's a wonderful time to watch what is going on and pray for my pals that need to treat again (and the new pals too!)
I'm not sure what you mean by this
And, although I'm happy with my 55, I wasn't 'technically' UND at that moment, so I guess that damn difference of 12 would make a difference if someone wanted to stop tx early because they weren't <43? Would that extra 12 make a difference in shorter tx? "
Weren't you UND at week 2 (I get so damned confused sometimes) what is the 55 (sorry I am having one of those days where I"d like to blame the brain fog ;)
I extended because I met the critera (UND by 24, 2log by week 12) and the Berg Study and the Sanchez Tapias study provided data that it would increase my chances. If I had not had met those marks at week 24 I would have stopped and then waited and started treatment all over from the beginning (probably with Infergen as I was already almost double dosing the riba and some days the interferon too so I really couldn't have added more meds or anything and at the time Telapravir was in early early stages of development...Infergen would have been what my doctor would have most likely done).
As you can see in just a few short years things have changed DRASTICALLY giving heppers so many more options. It's a wonderful time to watch what is going on and pray for my pals that need to treat again (and the new pals too!)
I'm not sure what you mean by this
And, although I'm happy with my 55, I wasn't 'technically' UND at that moment, so I guess that damn difference of 12 would make a difference if someone wanted to stop tx early because they weren't <43? Would that extra 12 make a difference in shorter tx? "
Weren't you UND at week 2 (I get so damned confused sometimes) what is the 55 (sorry I am having one of those days where I"d like to blame the brain fog ;)
yea it makes sense.
and at some point <615 and <315 was UND?
and yea, that was a close call for you, would have affected everything for you.
Also, so if you are not UND at week 12, is the criteria what kind of log drop you've had whether or not they allow you to continue TX? And like you, that you were so low?
And then at that point do they just start you at full tx length from the time you clear?
I know the gt is taken into consideration too, right?
And, although I'm happy with my 55, I wasn't 'technically' UND at that moment, so I guess that damn difference of 12 would make a difference if someone wanted to stop tx early because they weren't <43? Would that extra 12 make a difference in shorter tx?
and at some point <615 and <315 was UND?
and yea, that was a close call for you, would have affected everything for you.
Also, so if you are not UND at week 12, is the criteria what kind of log drop you've had whether or not they allow you to continue TX? And like you, that you were so low?
And then at that point do they just start you at full tx length from the time you clear?
I know the gt is taken into consideration too, right?
And, although I'm happy with my 55, I wasn't 'technically' UND at that moment, so I guess that damn difference of 12 would make a difference if someone wanted to stop tx early because they weren't <43? Would that extra 12 make a difference in shorter tx?
Back in the olden days when some of us started the common test was to <615. I was lucky they had just started using the better test to <315 because at week 4 my VL was 411. Had they used the <615 I would never have known that I was not UND. Still past week 12 I was in stuck in the 400s. I would not have known I needed to extend to week 72 (I did clear by week 24) without them making these advances.
So I am always of the 'get the best test you can get' mind because of my prejudices for what almost happened to me. I'm sure at week 12 you can ask him for the <2 test since that is really such an important week - but again I really wouldn't sweat it (Unless you plan on trying to stop treatment early then I would make darn sure you were really totally UND by week 2, hope that makes sense)
So I am always of the 'get the best test you can get' mind because of my prejudices for what almost happened to me. I'm sure at week 12 you can ask him for the <2 test since that is really such an important week - but again I really wouldn't sweat it (Unless you plan on trying to stop treatment early then I would make darn sure you were really totally UND by week 2, hope that makes sense)
yea Bill that does make sense, it's just after having this for so long, you kinda want to get as far away from it as possible, and a lower number than 43 I think would just help you feel that way. If I can squeeze a fancier test in at some point, you know I will :)
Thanks,
Bree
Thanks,
Bree
The only real reason to test *anything* is if something can be altered or changed Bree. For instance, if you found out that somehow you had persistent viremia between 43 IU and say, 2 IU; what actions would you take; would you somehow change your treatment strategy?
If not, the additional resources really don’t accomplish anything.
When I was treating, a common viral test was ‘bDNA’ testing with a lower limit of sensitivity of 615 IU, and many of us treated successfully back then.
To answer your question, I don’t think a sensitive test is indicated post therapy; if you relapse, it’s assumed your viral load would b in the tens if not hundreds of thousands within hours or days.
Good luck—
Bill
If not, the additional resources really don’t accomplish anything.
When I was treating, a common viral test was ‘bDNA’ testing with a lower limit of sensitivity of 615 IU, and many of us treated successfully back then.
To answer your question, I don’t think a sensitive test is indicated post therapy; if you relapse, it’s assumed your viral load would b in the tens if not hundreds of thousands within hours or days.
Good luck—
Bill
I copied that info Dave, when do you think it would be best to get the more sensitive test, after tx?
Labcorp (HCV), Quantitative, Real-time PCR is a very commonly used PCR during treatment. It has a quantitative range of 43 IU/mL to 69,000,000 IU/mL.
They also offer NGI QuantaSure which has a quantitative range of 2-2,000,000 IU/mL or 5-5,000,000 copies/mL and I think I read that they have reinstated their PCR which has a sensitivity of <10 IU/mL but I don't know the name of it.
Quest Diagnostics offers Heptimax with a quantitative range of 5 IU/mL to 50 MM IU/mL.
The sensitivity is lower and cost is higher.
Of course the more sensitive the test the better it makes us feel but I would be very comfortable with a range of <43.
They also offer NGI QuantaSure which has a quantitative range of 2-2,000,000 IU/mL or 5-5,000,000 copies/mL and I think I read that they have reinstated their PCR which has a sensitivity of <10 IU/mL but I don't know the name of it.
Quest Diagnostics offers Heptimax with a quantitative range of 5 IU/mL to 50 MM IU/mL.
The sensitivity is lower and cost is higher.
Of course the more sensitive the test the better it makes us feel but I would be very comfortable with a range of <43.
I see. And I like that number, 2.
Do we know if the virus dies slowly or mostly all at once on one day, or does it vary?
And if you are a 55 like I was, does that mean that just a couple of guys are fighting back trying to hang on? And can one little drop of virus really hide out anywhere like in your toe?
Do we know if the virus dies slowly or mostly all at once on one day, or does it vary?
And if you are a 55 like I was, does that mean that just a couple of guys are fighting back trying to hang on? And can one little drop of virus really hide out anywhere like in your toe?
labcorp make the most sensitive test available. It can detect as low as 2 iu/ml
Hepatitis C Virus NGI QuantaSure™ by PCR, Quantitative test number 140639
many doctors use the test that is sensitive to 43. My trial uses the taqman 2.0 test which is good to 10 iu/ml.
viral load can range from many millions to zero iu/ml I assume your question was how low can a test detect?
In a perfect world it is best to be und by the lowest test available when treating and trying to determine if you are really und. because of test expense and insurance many doctors use the tests that are sensitive to 43 iu/ml
If you have chronic hep c and are not treating or if you are post tx and testing to find out if you are svr my opinion is that it would not be important to have a test sensitive under 43 iu/ml because untreated hep c would never remain at such a low level.
I would still get the most sensitive test just to completely satisfy myself when I am through with tx I think.
- Dave
Hepatitis C Virus NGI QuantaSure™ by PCR, Quantitative test number 140639
many doctors use the test that is sensitive to 43. My trial uses the taqman 2.0 test which is good to 10 iu/ml.
viral load can range from many millions to zero iu/ml I assume your question was how low can a test detect?
In a perfect world it is best to be und by the lowest test available when treating and trying to determine if you are really und. because of test expense and insurance many doctors use the tests that are sensitive to 43 iu/ml
If you have chronic hep c and are not treating or if you are post tx and testing to find out if you are svr my opinion is that it would not be important to have a test sensitive under 43 iu/ml because untreated hep c would never remain at such a low level.
I would still get the most sensitive test just to completely satisfy myself when I am through with tx I think.
- Dave
I was tested to <2 so I was pretty darn sure I was UND. Of course you have to remember this can only determine what is in your blood work at the time, this is why some folks do have breakthrough and relapse...
Unfortunately it can't test 100% but even if it did I bet some would still come back as relapsers eventually (even though it would seem unlikely) it's the nature of the beast that it's a virus and could be hiding out in the fibrosis of your liver or in your big toe ;)
Being UND at your week though is a significant predictor of success so I wouldn't sweat it too much at all.
Unfortunately it can't test 100% but even if it did I bet some would still come back as relapsers eventually (even though it would seem unlikely) it's the nature of the beast that it's a virus and could be hiding out in the fibrosis of your liver or in your big toe ;)
Being UND at your week though is a significant predictor of success so I wouldn't sweat it too much at all.
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Hepatitis C Community
Learn about this treatable virus.
Getting tested for this viral infection.
3 key steps to getting on treatment.
4 steps to getting on therapy.
What you need to know about Hep C drugs.
How the drugs might affect you.
These tips may up your chances of a cure.
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
