Actually, when I posted, I used the terms the original poster used (note thread title). I suggested Viperine start a new thread which contained detailed stats of her treatment and tests. I suggested she use a title similar to her own title of this thread, but one that might be more specific to what she was really asking.
By definition:
re·ac·ti·vate
1. To make active again.
2. To restore the ability to function or the effectiveness of.
In my post I was not agreeing with the terms the original poster used, just giving her some tips to perhaps get more responses after she posted her stats (so that people could look at them stats and the timeline and giver more informed responses). In fact, I was pretty sceptical about her time line. I thought something must be wrong in the timeline or in her actual VL numbers.
There was an article on Medscape in Nov. that talked about reactivation of the Hep B virus and the Hep C virus. I remember it being discussed on the forum.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/753313
"November 10, 2011 (San Francisco, California) — Two separate studies, performed at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, demonstrate the potentially life-threatening impact of reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in patients undergoing immunosuppressive chemotherapy. ........."
Interestingly enough, the article mainly talks about Hep B reactivation and only at the very end of the article is Hep C discussed. However, if one reads the part pertaining to HCV, not once do they mention increasing viral loads. Their criteria for HCV reactivation was increasing ALT. I would question if the terms they used were appropriate. Increasing ALT does not mean increasing VL or Hep C "reactivation."
"HCV Reactivation"
"A study from the same institution looked at HCV reactivation in patients who had undergone treatment with rituximab and gemcitabine. In this retrospective chart review, investigators looked at the records of 308 HCV-infected patients treated at M.D. Anderson over a 1-year period. HCV exacerbation was defined as a greater than 3-fold increase in ALT in the absence of hepatotoxic drugs, systemic coinfection, recent blood transfusions, and tumor infiltration of the liver.
"We found that 11% of patients who received this chemotherapy developed reactivation of HCV," reported coinvestigator Harrys Torres, MD, assistant professor of infectious diseases at M.D. Anderson. "Interestingly, none of these patients died with liver failure, which is different than with HBV reactivation."
What concerns Dr. Torres is that HCV reactivation necessitates discontinuation of chemotherapy. 'We have to stop chemo in 50% of cases," he said. "It seems that HCV reactivation does not compromise the patient from the biologic standpoint, but from the oncologic standpoint, with treatment interruptions,' it does."
I also remember when that article was posted in Nov. that there was a discussion on the forum. Here is a link to the thread:
http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Hepatitis-C/HBV--HCV-Reactivation-During-Chemotherapy-of-Concern/show/1626394
You will see that further down in the post Bali points out a key difference in the Hep B virus and the Hep C virus:
"It is my understanding that HCV unlike HBV and HIV does not enter
the cell nucleus to leave a reservoir. What this means is that
HCV can be completely eradicated whereas HBV does only get
suppressed to a ponit where ones own imune system can keep it
that way. I could therefore see the likelyhood of HBV being
reactivated a lot more than HCV. "
Stef2011 made these commens:
"i can clear all abou hbv because i am very expert, hbv is almost never cleared only immune controlled.the word clearance from acute hbv is scientifically wrong, hbv like herpes will always stay in the human dna of infected persons even if they cleared the virus
so hbv carriers, both cronic carriers or those who cleared the infection anytime in their life, are a risk of death with chemio without antivirals because they get a lethal type which most of the time leads to death
hcv should be different but i am not expert enough to say, i just know it is easier to clear because it doesnt integrate in human dna like hbv "
"hbv has also another bad thing, those who never got it in their life have the lowest risk of liver cancer. while those who had acute hbv and cleared, and those who are cronic carriers but hbvdna undetactable by antivirals, share the same risk of liver cancer.
unfortunately hbv integrated in human dna (which is called cccdna) remians but as long as immune system is working normally it can never reactivate an hbv infection, chemio probably destroys immune system complitely.....
this happens with steroids, artritis drugs, entercept, all immune suppressive drugs reactivate a cleared hbv infection.of course hbv antivirals can prevent this if taken before starting immune suppressive drugs
i dont know if entercept and artritis drugs can reactivate a clered hcv infection too"
Post by Bali:
"Exactly right , HCV is a RNA virus and HBV is a DNA virus.
HCV can be eradicated in the true meaning of the word
whereas a DNA virus such as HBV will always stay in the human DNA.
thanks for confirming that stef2011"
Step2011, in a later post in the same thread, explains even more and gives us much more information.
I would suggest to read the entire thread because several people posted important data and observations.