Aa
High alt/sgpt test
I am 39, always been very healthy, but overweight. Feel lousy last 10 months, had many blood tests everything normal except one liver alt/sgpt test was 71(norm 9-52), second test I am waiting for. I feel tired alot, pale gums, tingles throughout my head. I excerise 3 miles a day, on a good diet, but feel awful. I have ringing in my ears too. I am SOOOOO sick of feeling sick. I have lost 38lbs in the past 12 weeks, but I will feel great one day and like death the next. I am getting scared. HELP???
Kalio: There is a lot more evidence out there that says it isn't a substitute for a biopsy and isn't reliable.
------------------------------------------
What are you basing this statement on? What evidence are you referring to? Everything I've seen shows Fibrosure accurate at the two extreme ends -- stage 0 and stage 4.
------------------------------------------
What are you basing this statement on? What evidence are you referring to? Everything I've seen shows Fibrosure accurate at the two extreme ends -- stage 0 and stage 4.
So your position has changed and now you think Fibrosure can be used in lieu of a biopsy when making the treat or wait decision? I would want a liver biospy to back up what the FibroSURE test was saying to help me decide on starting or deferring treatment. She has decided to treat so it is a moot point. Should she decide to go the route you are encouraging her to, to wait and deal with it down the road, liver biospy is still considered, as I understand it, the gold standard for evaluating liver damage and Fibrosure is still considered inferior in it's ability to access damage.
I think if you are going to advocate that people put off dealing with their disease and wait on better things that might come in the future it is a good idea to encourage them to get the best evaluation available, and that is a biopsy. I posted one study on it's inaccuracies, you can google it and find lots more.
Yes, it is supposed to be ok for evaluating damage at either end of the spectrum but without a biopsy to back it up, I (and many doctors agree) it is risky to rely on it.
I think if you are going to advocate that people put off dealing with their disease and wait on better things that might come in the future it is a good idea to encourage them to get the best evaluation available, and that is a biopsy. I posted one study on it's inaccuracies, you can google it and find lots more.
Yes, it is supposed to be ok for evaluating damage at either end of the spectrum but without a biopsy to back it up, I (and many doctors agree) it is risky to rely on it.
<<So your position has changed and now you think Fibrosure can be used in lieu of a biopsy when making the treat or wait decision?
Not at all. If it were me, I would *probably* get a biopsy in addition to the Fibrosure and a Firbroscan as well. I'm belt and suspenders that way and in fact have had 4-5 biopsies over the past 40 years plus two Fibroscans this past year alone. I emphasized "probably" because Fibroscan has shown accuracy on the two extreme ends of the spectrum, it's in the middle where it's may not be that accurate. You made a previous statement that "it isn't all the accurate". In the context of a stage "0", again, what are you basing that statment on.
<<<She has decided to treat so it is a moot point.
Indeed she hasn't. In fact, she stated in her previous post (see C4) that she is seeing another doctor to revisit that decision. But even if she wasn't going to see another doctor -- just like her retired liver-researcher friend told her.
<<I think if you are going to advocate that people put off dealing with their disease and wait on better things that might come in the future it is a good idea to encourage them to get the best evaluation available, and that is a biopsy.
You've been reading my posts for a long, long time and you know I encourage those not treating to get a liver biopsy in most cases. Some don't want to and I've then encouraged Fibroscan as a good alternative. Fibrosure doesn't stage very well in the middle but as stated, has shown to be accurate at stage 0 and stage 4. If it were me, I'd probably get all three at some point, but more to the point -- given what information MyOwn has right now, I wouldn't encourage her to treat but to watch and wait. Watch and wait is not exclusive of liver biopsy, in fact liver biopsy is often a part of that.
<<KKI posted one study on it's inaccuracies, you can google it and find lots more.
Again, the studies show it's inaccurate in the middle, not at stage 0 and stage 4. If you have a study that contradicts this, please post.
-------------
Just to be very clear, I'm not suggesting MyOwn should not get a needle biopsy. But based on the info she has now, I'm also not suggesting she treat. Are you?
Be well. Glad your sx's seem to be easing up.
-- Jim
Not at all. If it were me, I would *probably* get a biopsy in addition to the Fibrosure and a Firbroscan as well. I'm belt and suspenders that way and in fact have had 4-5 biopsies over the past 40 years plus two Fibroscans this past year alone. I emphasized "probably" because Fibroscan has shown accuracy on the two extreme ends of the spectrum, it's in the middle where it's may not be that accurate. You made a previous statement that "it isn't all the accurate". In the context of a stage "0", again, what are you basing that statment on.
<<<She has decided to treat so it is a moot point.
Indeed she hasn't. In fact, she stated in her previous post (see C4) that she is seeing another doctor to revisit that decision. But even if she wasn't going to see another doctor -- just like her retired liver-researcher friend told her.
<<I think if you are going to advocate that people put off dealing with their disease and wait on better things that might come in the future it is a good idea to encourage them to get the best evaluation available, and that is a biopsy.
You've been reading my posts for a long, long time and you know I encourage those not treating to get a liver biopsy in most cases. Some don't want to and I've then encouraged Fibroscan as a good alternative. Fibrosure doesn't stage very well in the middle but as stated, has shown to be accurate at stage 0 and stage 4. If it were me, I'd probably get all three at some point, but more to the point -- given what information MyOwn has right now, I wouldn't encourage her to treat but to watch and wait. Watch and wait is not exclusive of liver biopsy, in fact liver biopsy is often a part of that.
<<KKI posted one study on it's inaccuracies, you can google it and find lots more.
Again, the studies show it's inaccurate in the middle, not at stage 0 and stage 4. If you have a study that contradicts this, please post.
-------------
Just to be very clear, I'm not suggesting MyOwn should not get a needle biopsy. But based on the info she has now, I'm also not suggesting she treat. Are you?
Be well. Glad your sx's seem to be easing up.
-- Jim
The "<" seemed to have erased what the reference was to. Probably an HTML code thing. I'm going to re-post the previous thread so it make sense.
Kalio said prev: So your position has changed and now you think Fibrosure can be used in lieu of a biopsy when making the treat or wait decision?
----------------------------------------
Not at all. If it were me, I would *probably* get a biopsy in addition to the Fibrosure and a Firbroscan as well. I'm belt and suspenders that way and in fact have had 4-5 biopsies over the past 40 years plus two Fibroscans this past year alone. I emphasized "probably" because Fibroscan has shown accuracy on the two extreme ends of the spectrum, it's in the middle where it's may not be that accurate. You made a previous statement that "it isn't all the accurate". In the context of a stage "0", again, what are you basing that statment on.
Kalio said prev: She has decided to treat so it is a moot point.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed she hasn't. In fact, she stated in her previous post (see C4) that she is seeing another doctor to revisit that decision. But even if she wasn't going to see another doctor -- just like her retired liver-researcher friend told her.
Kalio said prev: I think if you are going to advocate that people put off dealing with their disease and wait on better things that might come in the future it is a good idea to encourage them to get the best evaluation available, and that is a biopsy.
---------------------------------------------------------
You've been reading my posts for a long, long time and you know I encourage those not treating to get a liver biopsy in most cases. Some don't want to and I've then encouraged Fibroscan as a good alternative. Fibrosure doesn't stage very well in the middle but as stated, has shown to be accurate at stage 0 and stage 4. If it were me, I'd probably get all three at some point, but more to the point -- given what information MyOwn has right now, I wouldn't encourage her to treat but to watch and wait. Watch and wait is not exclusive of liver biopsy, in fact liver biopsy is often a part of that.
Kalio said prev:. I posted one study on it's inaccuracies, you can google it and find lots more.
-------------------------------------------------------
Again, the studies show it's inaccurate in the middle, not at stage 0 and stage 4 and that is the case with MyOwn so generalties about Fibrosure do not apply. If you have a study that contradicts this, please post.
-------------------------------------------------------
Just to be very clear, I'm not suggesting MyOwn should not get a needle biopsy. But based on the info she has now, I'm also not suggesting she treat. Are you?
Be well. Glad your sx's seem to be easing up.
-- Jim
----------------------------------------
Not at all. If it were me, I would *probably* get a biopsy in addition to the Fibrosure and a Firbroscan as well. I'm belt and suspenders that way and in fact have had 4-5 biopsies over the past 40 years plus two Fibroscans this past year alone. I emphasized "probably" because Fibroscan has shown accuracy on the two extreme ends of the spectrum, it's in the middle where it's may not be that accurate. You made a previous statement that "it isn't all the accurate". In the context of a stage "0", again, what are you basing that statment on.
Kalio said prev: She has decided to treat so it is a moot point.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed she hasn't. In fact, she stated in her previous post (see C4) that she is seeing another doctor to revisit that decision. But even if she wasn't going to see another doctor -- just like her retired liver-researcher friend told her.
Kalio said prev: I think if you are going to advocate that people put off dealing with their disease and wait on better things that might come in the future it is a good idea to encourage them to get the best evaluation available, and that is a biopsy.
---------------------------------------------------------
You've been reading my posts for a long, long time and you know I encourage those not treating to get a liver biopsy in most cases. Some don't want to and I've then encouraged Fibroscan as a good alternative. Fibrosure doesn't stage very well in the middle but as stated, has shown to be accurate at stage 0 and stage 4. If it were me, I'd probably get all three at some point, but more to the point -- given what information MyOwn has right now, I wouldn't encourage her to treat but to watch and wait. Watch and wait is not exclusive of liver biopsy, in fact liver biopsy is often a part of that.
Kalio said prev:. I posted one study on it's inaccuracies, you can google it and find lots more.
-------------------------------------------------------
Again, the studies show it's inaccurate in the middle, not at stage 0 and stage 4 and that is the case with MyOwn so generalties about Fibrosure do not apply. If you have a study that contradicts this, please post.
-------------------------------------------------------
Just to be very clear, I'm not suggesting MyOwn should not get a needle biopsy. But based on the info she has now, I'm also not suggesting she treat. Are you?
Be well. Glad your sx's seem to be easing up.
-- Jim
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.
