Understanding Viral Load

[Gramsgrl]

Hello All,
I went into the lab this morning for my 4 week bloodwork and stopped into the Doctor's office to ask what the results of my 2 week viral load was. The nurse receptionist looked it up and told me she didn't understand the numbers but if it helped me , it said 2.9 . Now I know the Hep Nurse told me that before I started Harvoni that my Benefit Company was only covering 8 weeks because my viral load is only 6 million.  My question is , is my latest reading better and why can't they use the same method for recording the Viral Load Measurement???

Thanks Gramsgrl

[dragonslayer]

Might this not mean your starting load was 6 mil, and after 2 wks, its dropped to 2.9 mil?

[Philadelphia]

Or 2.9 could be the log value. 2.9 translates roughly to 794.

[Gramsgrl]

See? that's what I mean! When I look it up online I get different explanations. Very frustrating and my Doctor or Hep Nurse are unavailable until the end of May.  I like the idea that it may have dropped by half after only 2 weeks of treatment though. I am being so vigilant because if it doesn't appear to be dropping or close to undetected by at least 6 weeks , I want to go after my benefit company to approve me for the extra 4 weeks if needed.
Gramsgrl

[dragonslayer]

There is nobody in the office that can read you the results off the lab report??  There should be someone there who can at least fax or mail it to you, or read you verbatim the result over the phone.

[Philadelphia]

Yep, like dragons layer says you need a copy of your VL. I have tests done through two different labs because I am having sort of remote treatment - my treating specialist is 400km away, so I do some tests through his hospital and some through the pathology dept at my local hospital

Each reports the VL results in a slightly different way. Local hospital reports it as a log number, Sydney reports it as a number followed by a log.

I had two VL results from local hosp, plus two from Sydney hospital so I was able to backwards map the numbers and work out that when the local hospitals results said 0.04, it actually meant 40.

That's why you need a copy of the results - so you can see exactly what it means. Or you could ask her to read you EXACTLY what it says and post it here. There are smart people here. At the very least ask her if it's a log value.

Because I'm maths illiterate, I use this website to work stuff out.
http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/math/Log_Calculator.htm

[Gramsgrl]

Thanks Guys, I'm in Canada and my lab doesn't do online records yet. Apparently it is in the works but until then I can only get the results from my Doctor or his Hep C nurse. She is in on Thursday and I plan to e-mail her and ask her to phone me with the clearly explained VL results. She told me a few weeks ago that she won't share any results by e-mail.

[Philadelphia]

My two labs don't do online for patients, but I'm lucky that my nurse specialist recognises my neurotic control freak nature and sends me a copy of each test as she gets the results (which I then punch into a spreadsheet because I need to marry the two lots of info from two labs to keep track of it and did I mention obsessive control freak?)

Anyway, back to you, because this is about you - whatever it works out as - 2.9  million, 740 or just plain 2.9 (although I don't see how the last one is possible) it's a drop and we love seeing drops!

[Gramsgrl]

Amen, Philadelphia! 

[KimInTheForest]

I too am confused by my viral load results that I am getting from 2 different labs. Results from both labs appear use the same units of measure (IU/mL). But they differ by a factor of 100!

From my hometown clinic, my Feb. 2015 VL was 47650 IU/mL.
And my July 2014 VL was 109825 IU/mL.
Both nice low numbers as these things go.

But the out-of-town big city clinic where I started my 12-week trial today (YAY!) lists my viral load from two weeks ago as 8850000 IU/mL.

If commas were put in on that last number (which they aren't on the actual hard copy), that would be a VL of nearly 9 million. That's about 100x higher than the results I have been getting from my hometown clinic.

Perhaps there are different methods for measuring VL?

My hometown clinic uses a lab in Canada, and the VL test is described on the print-out as:
"Hepatitis C Virus RNA (PCR/NAAT)"

The out-of-town clinic running the trial I am now participating in (YAY!) uses an Indiana lab, and the VL test is described as:
"HCV RNA AMPLIPREP TAQMAN 2.0"

(I like to think the "2.0" is some reference to shifting the decimal point by 2 places, so that my real VL would just be 88,500. But you can see I am really going on nothing here except wishful thinking.)

I wasn't given a log10 IU/mL with the out-of-town clinic, so I can't compare those numbers.

Will ask my trial nurse or trial doctor to interpret the VL number for me when I next go in.

Whatever my VL is, it feels great to finally be DOING something about it with one of the new drugs (Harvoni+Ribavirin, in my case).

Wellness to all,
Kim

[Philadelphia]

I think you'll find the TaqMan V2 refers to Version 2 of the test. NAAT is a nucleic acid amplification test. And therein ends my knowledge.

[KimInTheForest]

I think you'll find the TaqMan V2 refers to Version 2 of the test. NAAT is a nucleic acid amplification test. And therein ends my knowledge.

Thanks Philadelphia.

kim

[Gramsgrl]

Hi All, I saw my Nurse yesterday and she had my results from my week 6 blood work. At the start of Harvoni treatment on April 7, 2015 my viral load was 2.87E+6 IU/ml and my result for the 6 week was just " Detected". It had a note saying, The result for HCV RNA is below the linear range of the assay which is 15 IU/ml and thus the exact value cannot be calculated. My nurse assures me that my end of treatment Viral load (next week June 2nd) will come back as "UNDETECTED"!! Whoo Hoo! Doing my happy dance!

Hard to believe it is really true, wishing the same results for others,
Wendy