Are you sure that's correct? Whenever there is an E in the result, that's Scientific Notation which is peculiar to some Canadian labs.
When the VL is expressed in S.N., it will be e.g. 3.23E + 2 i.u./ml. The number following the + must be a whole number. The example I gave is equal to 323 i.u./ml.
VL expressed in Log. units is different.
TeddyTrout said
Jan 26, 2013
mallani wrote:
Hi Jack,
Are you sure that's correct? Whenever there is an E in the result, that's Scientific Notation which is peculiar to some Canadian labs.
When the VL is expressed in S.N., it will be e.g. 3.23E + 2 i.u./ml. The number following the + must be a whole number. The example I gave is equal to 323 i.u./ml.
VL expressed in Log. units is different.
Offical lab results states the results asHepatitis C Virus RNA {Quantitative RT-PCR ] 3.23E+(2.51) IU/mL. Using the Roche Diagnostic Taqman Real Time HCV qualititative assay has a lower limit of detection of 15 IU/mL and a linear range of 43-G 9E& IU/ml. The log drop was indicated by a arrow down 3.64 * an is written by hand, this is vebatim so what does this all mean to me? good /bad?
-- Edited by TeddyTrout on Saturday 26th of January 2013 08:56:20 AM
TeddyTrout said
Jan 25, 2013
mallani wrote:
Hi Jack,
Your 8 week VL is 2.51 log, which is equivalent to 320 i.u./ml. That's a good drop. Now you need to be below 100 i.u./ml at week 12. It's confusing using log units, and I wish Labs could agree to only use i.u./ml. Here's another link for you. Good luck.
I guess The Canadian results are quoted diffrent as the Offical lab results states the results as 3.23E+(2.51) IU/mL 3.64, most likly a combined report from baseline. Using the Roche Diagnostic Taqman Real Time HCV qualititative assay has a lower limit of detection of 15 IU/mL and a linear range of 43-G 9E& IU/ml. {what ever that means LOL} My HGB has dropped to 103 so there having me do 1 less Riba pill per day for the next little while.
mallani said
Jan 23, 2013
Hi Jack,
Your 8 week VL is 2.51 log, which is equivalent to 320 i.u./ml. That's a good drop. Now you need to be below 100 i.u./ml at week 12. It's confusing using log units, and I wish Labs could agree to only use i.u./ml. Here's another link for you. Good luck.
Hi all sorry for not dropping by and saying hi and being supportive for all of you but I'ts been a rough time this 3 time around. I have just got my week 8 PCR and am not very encuraged buy the results but then I don't really know much about the information I now have and maybe you can weigh in and let me know. VL at the start was 6.15 and a week 4 leadin it dropped 1/2 log to 5.75 and at week 8 pcr it has rdropped tro 2.51 or a 3.64 log drop from base line.
mallani said
Dec 23, 2012
Hi Jack, not a great result. The link gives the SVR chances based on the leadin. Strange things can happen.
The influence oflead-inperiod forthe SVR is contradictory in different studies. For example, the following report forecastsSVR basing 8 weeks response:
Table 6. SVR by Virologic Response on Treatment (P05216) Cohorts 1 and 2 Combined
Virologic Response
Arm 2 (RGT)
SVR
n/N (%)
Arm 3 Boc/PR48
SVR
n/N (%)
Treatment Difference
Arm 2-Arm 3
[95% CI two sided]
Overall
233/368 (63.3)
242/366 (66.1)
2.8 [-9.8, 4.1]
*Early Responders
156/161 (96.9)
155/161 (96.3)
0.6 [-3.8, 5.2]
#Late Responders
45/68 (66)
55/73 (75)
-9.2 [-24.4, 6.3]
*Early Responders: Undetectable HCV RNA treatment Week 8 through 24 (In RGT arm, early responders received BOC/PR through Week treatment Week 28).
#Late Responders: Detectable HCV RNA Week 8, but undetectable by Week 24 (In RGT arm, late responders received 28 weeks BOC/PR, followed by 20 weeks of PR for total of 48 weeks. Subjects were discontinued for futility at Week 24 in all treatment arms if HCV RNA was detectable.
I discussedthe issue with thetwo experiencedhepatologistsand bothare guided byan 8 weekresponse(after 4weeks Victrelis).Poor responseinlead-inperiodonly increasesthe duration of therapy (until 36 or 48 weeks), but less important for final SVR with Victrelis.
-- Edited by Uval951 on Sunday 23rd of December 2012 01:15:13 PM
Daook said
Dec 22, 2012
Also Jack,
I didn't know fish ride bicycles!! hahaha!
Funny avatar.
:)
Daook said
Dec 22, 2012
It took me until week 6 to be undetected. Give it alittle time, it will work.
You might have a tough immune system fighting off the initial start of treatment. That happened to me back in 1980 the first time around for me.
Best of luck!!
:)
Uval951 said
Dec 22, 2012
Jack, don't worry yet. Wife's response was even worse after 4 weeks lead-in period. But Victrelis changes the results a lot and after 6th week (2 weeks of Victrelis only) she got UND.
I suggest to make PCR test after 6 weeks ( don't wait for standard 8 weeks) for better Tx duration schedule.
JoAnneh said
Dec 22, 2012
There are a lot of smart people on this forum What is your doctors opinion?
TeddyTrout said
Dec 22, 2012
Just got the news about my first PCR into the treatment. After 4 weeks of Interferon and riba I only had a 1/2 log drop. I'm into my 2 week of Victrelis Boceprvir and will have my second PCR in January, It's not looking good. I was a slow responder last time and had break through in a 72 week trial the last try in 05 but I had 2 log drops right up to week 24 was still positive but not able to do a count. I'm thinking I just might quit and wait and see if anything eles comes up. I'm a stage 3/2 back in 07.
Hi Jack,
Are you sure that's correct? Whenever there is an E in the result, that's Scientific Notation which is peculiar to some Canadian labs.
When the VL is expressed in S.N., it will be e.g. 3.23E + 2 i.u./ml. The number following the + must be a whole number. The example I gave is equal to 323 i.u./ml.
VL expressed in Log. units is different.
Offical lab results states the results asHepatitis C Virus RNA {Quantitative RT-PCR ] 3.23E+(2.51) IU/mL. Using the Roche Diagnostic Taqman Real Time HCV qualititative assay has a lower limit of detection of 15 IU/mL and a linear range of 43-G 9E& IU/ml. The log drop was indicated by a arrow down 3.64 * an is written by hand, this is vebatim so what does this all mean to me? good /bad?
-- Edited by TeddyTrout on Saturday 26th of January 2013 08:56:20 AM
I guess The Canadian results are quoted diffrent as the Offical lab results states the results as 3.23E+(2.51) IU/mL 3.64, most likly a combined report from baseline. Using the Roche Diagnostic Taqman Real Time HCV qualititative assay has a lower limit of detection of 15 IU/mL and a linear range of 43-G 9E& IU/ml. {what ever that means LOL} My HGB has dropped to 103 so there having me do 1 less Riba pill per day for the next little while.
Hi Jack,
Your 8 week VL is 2.51 log, which is equivalent to 320 i.u./ml. That's a good drop. Now you need to be below 100 i.u./ml at week 12. It's confusing using log units, and I wish Labs could agree to only use i.u./ml. Here's another link for you. Good luck.
http://www.natap.org/2011/HCV/stopping.htm
Hi all sorry for not dropping by and saying hi and being supportive for all of you but I'ts been a rough time this 3 time around. I have just got my week 8 PCR and am not very encuraged buy the results but then I don't really know much about the information I now have and maybe you can weigh in and let me know. VL at the start was 6.15 and a week 4 leadin it dropped 1/2 log to 5.75 and at week 8 pcr it has rdropped tro 2.51 or a 3.64 log drop from base line.
Hi Jack, not a great result. The link gives the SVR chances based on the leadin. Strange things can happen.
http://www.victrelis.com/boceprevir/victrelis/hcp/dosing/lead-in-phase.jsp
The influence of lead-in period for the SVR is contradictory in different studies. For example, the following report forecasts SVR basing 8 weeks response:
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/AntiviralDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM252341.pdf page 9:
Table 6. SVR by Virologic Response on Treatment (P05216) Cohorts 1 and 2 Combined
Virologic Response
Arm 2 (RGT)
SVR
n/N (%)
Arm 3 Boc/PR48
SVR
n/N (%)
Treatment Difference
Arm 2-Arm 3
[95% CI two sided]
Overall
233/368 (63.3)
242/366 (66.1)
2.8 [-9.8, 4.1]
*Early Responders
156/161 (96.9)
155/161 (96.3)
0.6 [-3.8, 5.2]
#Late Responders
45/68 (66)
55/73 (75)
-9.2 [-24.4, 6.3]
*Early Responders: Undetectable HCV RNA treatment Week 8 through 24 (In RGT arm, early responders received BOC/PR through Week treatment Week 28).
#Late Responders: Detectable HCV RNA Week 8, but undetectable by Week 24 (In RGT arm, late responders received 28 weeks BOC/PR, followed by 20 weeks of PR for total of 48 weeks. Subjects were discontinued for futility at Week 24 in all treatment arms if HCV RNA was detectable.
I discussed the issue with the two experienced hepatologists and both are guided by an 8 week response (after 4 weeks Victrelis). Poor response in lead-in period only increases the duration of therapy (until 36 or 48 weeks), but less important for final SVR with Victrelis.
-- Edited by Uval951 on Sunday 23rd of December 2012 01:15:13 PM
Also Jack,
I didn't know fish ride bicycles!! hahaha!
Funny avatar.
:)
It took me until week 6 to be undetected. Give it alittle time, it will work.
You might have a tough immune system fighting off the initial start of treatment. That happened to me back in 1980 the first time around for me.
Best of luck!!
:)
Jack, don't worry yet. Wife's response was even worse after 4 weeks lead-in period. But Victrelis changes the results a lot and after 6th week (2 weeks of Victrelis only) she got UND.
I suggest to make PCR test after 6 weeks ( don't wait for standard 8 weeks) for better Tx duration schedule.
What is your doctors opinion?
Just got the news about my first PCR into the treatment. After 4 weeks of Interferon and riba I only had a 1/2 log drop. I'm into my 2 week of Victrelis Boceprvir and will have my second PCR in January, It's not looking good. I was a slow responder last time and had break through in a 72 week trial the last try in 05 but I had 2 log drops right up to week 24 was still positive but not able to do a count. I'm thinking I just might quit and wait and see if anything eles comes up. I'm a stage 3/2 back in 07.