Lab Corp no longer offering <10 PCR.

[orleans]

Scared the c**p outa me for sure. As most of you know I dropped the RIBA a few weeks ago. Well I did a PCR, checking on break thru. When I called my lab lady she read the results saying "<43" HCV RNA not detected." I'm LIKE, what's this <43?? She doesn't know, she said it was the same test we've been doing from the start which is the 10 to 100,000,000 . (been UND <10 from week 2) Of course I'm thinking of the confusion during the Telaprivir trials and others. Well I'm a LITTLE worried at this point so she starts making calls trying to find something out. That was yesterday, got the word this morn. Lab Crop has stopped the 10-100,000,000 and in it's place is using a 43-69,000,000. The L.Corp lady told my lady that they considered this test more reliable and consistant. I am still UND. jerry

[Hepatitis Researcher]

not sure was that actually means:

"the study that showed HVL or 2,000,000 copies was a neg used one of his tests.
and that couldn't converted easily to the other tests being used at the time. "

??

[CockSparrow]

I am with you. It makes no sense.
While i can accept that the different amplication methods can produce different results
having a range of 0.9 to 5.2 for copies to IUs makes you wonder what it is thats actually being detected. It doesnt appear to be virons.

Indirectly IUs are all HRs fault anyway.
the study that showed HVL or 2,000,000 copies was a neg used one of his tests.
and that couldnt converted easily to the other tests being used at the time.

CS

[Rockerforlife]

The above comment is outdated on the current limit detection...but the ratio between I/U and copies /ml  seem to be about the same

[Rockerforlife]

Currently available PCR assays will detect HCV RNA in serum down to a lower limit of 50 to 100 copies per milliliter (mL), which is equivalent to 25 to 50 international units (IU).

http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/chronichepc/

[Rockerforlife]

VIRIONS are virus particles: they are the INERT CARRIERS of the genome, and are ASSEMBLED inside cells,  from virus-specified components: they do not GROW, and do not form by DIVISION


http://www.mcb.uct.ac.za/tutorial/virions_are_virus_particles.htm

[jmjm530]

How is it standardized when one test uses 1ui/ml to equal 5.2 virons=iU/ml,  and another uses 1iU/ml to = 3.7 or 2.5, etc, as in your above chart of different tests protocols.
Isn't 1 virion equal to 1 virion standardization at its simplest ?
----------------------
I agree that 1 virion must equal 1 virion, but the chart and article showed different convesions between *copies* and IU/ml, not between virons and IU/ml as you're suggesting they might --  so I'm assuming that 1 copy does not necessarily equal 1 viron. If it does, then I need some clarification myself because then the whole IU/ml wouldn't make any sense and I don't believe even HR went that far, although I admit sometimes I don't follow completely some of his studied techincal explanations.

-- Jim