I think you're talking about Fibroscan FDA "trial" criteria, which wants you to have a biopsy within X number of months of the scan.
To the best of my knowledge HR is not participating in the trial therefore has different criteria, but you should really hear confirmed that from him.
Second, I had two scans, one during tx and one after. I had them as a private patient, so it's possible that for those like me the criteria was either relaxed or not necessary and they may or may not use my stats in the trial. Don't know, didn't really ask. Just glad I was able to get the scans. I also believe Dr. S in Miami may use the scan on private patients as well, as I don't believe he also is part of the trial but again just a supposition. I think within the next year or two we will be seeing these scans showing up in a lot more places. Hopefully.
-- Jim
Great title for a thread! apologies if you've already replied to these questions. It's quite possible I missed the answers in the threads below.
- as noted earlier, HCV's rapid replication and sloppy polymerase would seem to argue against any enduring "senescence" on the part of residual virus. The phylogenetic analysis in Castillo of the 302-bp core sequence should provide good evidence in that regard. Do you think those PCR products are likely to be as reliable as those of the 5' non-coding region?
- the results you mentioned re unreleased intra cell HBV would seem to be another reason to focus on cell rather serum RNA detection. Though PBMC assays seem to be available for research (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16384611&query_hl=12&itool=pubmed_DocSum">Pugnale'06</a>), they are not available commercially. Why are cell-based assays not routinely done?
- HCV's ability to mutate past whatever roadblocks are put in its path is part of the reason I'm a bit skeptical that, to the disappointment of vertex investors, any of the new HCV-targeted drugs will individually provide a signifcant improvement over ifn/riba (though the effect of simultaneously going after the polymerase(NM283) and the protease (vx-950, SCH 503034) may put a bit more of a squeeze on the virus). However, the fact that HCV is so very picky about its host organism must be an Achilles heel. Though it can quickly sample all the genomic forms that enable it to survive in a host, the host mechanisms are limited and very stable. My pet candidate is the IRES, which is among HCV's most conserved regions. However none of the drug companies seem to be going down that path though the crystal structure is available. Any idea why this is not being pursued?
- do you have any thoughts on the credibility of the <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?itool=abstractplus&db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=16618405">Pan'06</a> non-hepatic findings and the criticisms raised by Perelson (original thread closed)
Thanks for making us hep c chicks feel wanted. lol
Forget Rev. I'm offering palpitations regardless of viral load.
The scoop is that I need to move on. Or move with the company. So I now have two live offers, and I'm streesing a bit about which to take.
A) Passionate position, fun, interesting, blaah-blah. Little less money, Kaiser HMO, no LTD or Life Ins.
B) Pretty OK position. I could be happy and stay a long time. More money, better bene's over all.
I'm inclined to throw caution to the wind, and go with A.