Viral load

[Richelieu]

I started harvoni treatment 2 weeks ago.
My VL was 900000. In 2014 2,6 millions, 2013 450000. If the VL is oscillating without treatment how come we use it as a reference point when it comes to consider someone cured? and is this VL significantly indicate how bad your liver is damaged?

thx

[gnatcatcher]

Richelieu, your VL is only one of several measures that, taken together, paint a portrait of the health of your liver.  ALT, AST, ultrasound, and some measure of fibrosis (such as biopsy or FibroScan or FibroSure) are among the other measures that may be used.

VLs do jump around a lot, but usually within one log of each other. Your results probably also contain a logarithmic value:
2013     450,000 = 5.65 log10
2014  2,600,000 = 6.41 log10
2015     900,000 = 5.95 log10
There is a less than one log difference between the smallest (5.65) and largest (6.41).

When you get lab results after four weeks of Harvoni, the doctor is looking for a more than 2 log drop between your smallest VL and your new VL. In your case, any value 4,500 or smaller shows that the treatment is working. Your VL will probably be below 450, which is a 3 log drop (450 = 2.65 log 10), and it may even be undetected. Harvoni is amazing!

Even at small amounts, your VL might continue to fluctuate somewhat if you have frequent VL tests during and after treatment. Some people become undetected at the four week point and stay that way all the way through to 12 weeks after the end of treatment. Others may oscillate between undetected and very low VLs on the various tests. Others may not get their first undetected reading until 12 weeks after the end of treatment.

A few people, unfortunately, still show the presence of the Hep C virus 12 weeks after the end of treatment; they are considered non-responders. Another very few people had an undetected VL at some point in the process, but Hep C is detected in their VL taken 12 weeks after the end of treatment; they have relapsed.

Anyone whose VL 12 weeks after the end of treatment is undetected is considered to be cured, because a relapse at that point is highly unlikely (unless the person is newly reinfected somehow). Because the only really important VL tests are a pre-treatment value (used as a baseline), the VL after four weeks of treatment (to see if there's been at least a 2 log drop), and the VL 12 weeks after the end of treatment (to see if you are cured), many doctors do not order more frequent VL tests -- they are expensive and may scare patients unnecessarily if the results oscillate.

Gnatty

[annajustanna]

gnatty - love your pic of the fly catcher!!!!  thank you soooo much for this info. I will be seeing MD at 0830 tomorrow to see how treatment is going. I started treatment almost 5 weeks ago. I wrote down key points to ask MD about. Question for you please - when measuring viral loads = increase or decrease I can just add or subtract a zero - Right. Little confused about this. For exp. if my VL has decreased by 2 and I started at say 500000 I would now be down to 5000. Is this accurate??? I have appreciated this forum. It has educated me and given me hope. However the thread of Post treatment really got me depressed - had to quit reading it. Seems not even close to 95-99% success rate. Thanks again everyone - annajustanna

[gnatcatcher]

Yes, annajustanna, you are correct, not only about log calculations but about your cure for the Post Treatment Blues. We can choose a mindset that ups our odds. Glad you're going into your MD appointment with written questions; please post any nuggets of wisdom the MD utters. Thanks.
Gnatty
P.S. the pic is of a Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (a really tiny bird) that allowed me a few photo ops this spring. I like to visualize Harvoni eating all of my of Hep C "gnats."

[drummerman]

Hey Gnat,

Just had my 3rd blood draw today. 
My nurse started saying how they would do one at the end of tx (actually I am scheduled a week after I take final dose).
She also said I would be checked a 3 months and then at 12 months.

She also once again, said I was "undetected".

I asked her if at the end of tx would they do a qualitative  test (which I want) or a quantitative test, which is what all three have been so far.

She then told me (and I'm not making this up)  ... that "they were the same thing".

She is so sweet and nice and helpful...I just didn't have the nerve or energy to discuss it with her.  But ... cmon....  Do your homework.

So anyway, I guess all I will get is quantitative tests.... is this normal?  Should I ask my doctor for a qualitative test, or is it even necessary.

I know qualitative is more expensive and the docs may be getting advice from insurance companies that qualitative is not necessary??

Am I missing something here?

3 weeks to go.

dm

[drummerman]

I started harvoni treatment 2 weeks ago.
My VL was 900000. In 2014 2,6 millions, 2013 450000. If the VL is oscillating without treatment how come we use it as a reference point when it comes to consider someone cured? and is this VL significantly indicate how bad your liver is damaged?

thx

Viral load is poor indicator of liver damage.... unlike with HIV.

I thought this was a really good discussion on viral load, even though a little dated, cause it talks about interferon.... but the info on vl is still valid.

check it out.
http://www.webmd.com/hepatitis/c-hcv-viral-load

dm

[drummerman]

"Anyone whose VL 12 weeks after the end of treatment is undetected is considered to be cured, because a relapse at that point is highly unlikely (unless the person is newly reinfected somehow). Because the only really important VL tests are a pre-treatment value (used as a baseline), the VL after four weeks of treatment (to see if there's been at least a 2 log drop), and the VL 12 weeks after the end of treatment (to see if you are cured), many doctors do not order more frequent VL tests -- they are expensive and may scare patients unnecessarily if the results oscillate."

yes, but does UND have to be measured with qualitative test??  This is what concerns me. .. or again... does it matter?

dm

[gnatcatcher]

. . . I asked her if at the end of tx would they do a qualitative  test (which I want) or a quantitative test, which is what all three have been so far. She then told me (and I'm not making this up)  ... that "they were the same thing". . .

. . . does UND have to be measured with qualitative test??  This is what concerns me. .. or again... does it matter?

drummerman, thanks for supplying that link -- it covers several issues well.

As for what your nurse said, local labs often send blood samples out to a specialty labs for things like HCV RNA. It may be that the specialty lab your doctor uses offers only one version -- the quantitative. (See http://www.clevelandclinicmeded.com/online/monograph/hepc/page2.htm  Note especially: "Although qualitative HCV RNA assays are more sensitive, they do not provide a quantitative value for the viral load. In fact, many laboratories do not offer qualitative testing any more.") But this is not necessarily a problem.

The impression I have is that years ago, the qualitative version (which just tells you that you have active Hep C virus or you don't) used to be able to detect a much smaller amount of VL than the quantitative version (which must be able to count the individual Hep C "buggers" in the blood sample). I think the quantitative version has gotten better and better over the years, meaning that it can now give an accurate count of even quite low numbers of Hep C "buggers." In other words, the quantitative test has gotten very nearly as sensitive as the qualitative, so the need to have a separate qualitative test has gone away. CONCLUSION: these days, the quantitative test is plenty good enough to answer both the question of whether you have any active Hep C virus and, if you do, how much you have.

[drummerman]

Thank you so much gn.  A perfect explanation.... makes total sense.

I just thought I was being cheated out of the most important test!

So the way you explain it then... it is quite possible that many of the members on this forum are being told they are UND based solely on the quantitative test.

And when my nurse says I am UND, she , in a sense, is telling me the truth based on the sensitivity of the quantitative test....   >15 could be anywhere from 0-15 and for all practical purposes IS und.

For those reading this..... could you please post if you had a qualitative test as well as quantitative??  just curious.

thanks!
dm

[KimInTheForest]

I think that we are now at a stage in terms of the technology where it may be possible for the same machine to do both qualitative and quantitative. Maybe even at same time? In any case, I think the quantitative is so much more sensitive these days that it is sufficient for determining SVR.

Also, "Undetected" does not mean it could be anywhere from 0-14. That would be written:

" <15 IU/mL HCV RNA detected"

At least that's the way my Week 2 results came back before I hit undetected at Week 4, which looked like this:

"No HCV RNA detected"

So the machine can tell the difference between zero HCV and a few bits and pieces below the LLOQ, and it reports it accordingly. Undetected really is zero HCV - at least in that one little vial of your blood. But that's the reason for waiting 12 weeks post-tx. If there was any HCV anywhere in your body, it would have replicated in those intervening 12 weeks and would be detected when you go for your SVR12 test.

The machine/test being used for my VL tests is:

HCV RNA AMPLIPREP TAQMAN 2.0

When I google that, it looks like that machine/system can be used for a Quantitative or Qualitative test of HCV RNA:

http://molecular.roche.com/diseases/Pages/hcv.aspx

kim

[drummerman]

Interesting Kim.

thanks.

I'll just have to see how this all plays out. 

Guess the true bottom line is SVR and not necessarily UND which could be a matter of interpretation... depending on if you got a quantitative test vs. qualitative  test.

dm

[drummerman]

Well here is what my lab is using...
COBAS TaqMan HCV test.

and here is what the manufacture says on their website:
"The COBAS® TaqMan® HCV Test, v2.0 For Use With The High Pure System is not intended for use as a screening test for the presence of HCV in blood or blood products or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HCV infection."

huh?

I think I gonna ask my doc if he could order a qualitative test at EOT.  Opinions?? Or am I obsessing way too much about  this and should just let it go.

dm

[KimInTheForest]

The part I don't really understand about SVR and viral loads is why is it that SVR12 was not sufficient to declare "cured" with the old tx (INF/riba) but it is with the new? I mean, if the patient has zero virus detected at EOT, and is still zero 12 weeks later (SVR12), then why would the virus be able to stage a comeback after that with INF treatment but it apparently cannot (or at least very rarely) with new all-oral treatment?

kim

[KimInTheForest]

I think I gonna ask my doc if he could order a qualitative test at EOT.  Opinions?? Or am I obsessing way too much about  this and should just let it go.
dm

Well, we all have to obsess over something during this tumultuous life-changing journey we are embarked on. I obsessed endlessly about whether my morning milk-drinking was inactivating the ledipasvir in my Harvoni. It caused me a lot of stress. Seriously…

kim

[drummerman]

Apparently this discussion has been going on for some time.... missed it first go around cause I never got the 2 log drop, so never paid attention.... and the debate continues!

Even though most of these posts were from 2007, there sure were a lot of folk arguing to get the most sensitive test your lab can offer.  And even in 2007 many were arguing for a test that would measure down to >5. 

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Hepatitis-C/more-sensitive-pcr/show/383166

I liked what "hepatitis researcher" ( who I alway heard was Dr. Douglass Dietrich, Mt. Sanai Hospital, famous HCV researcher and apparently had a hand in inventing some of the vl machines)  had to say (below)... don't know if still relevant , things have changed so much...

"If you stop treatment  (EOT) and have still detectable virus circulating - real virus not false positives- then you have to assume that these viruses are now too crippled /mutated or under actual effective control of the immune system  so that they cannot restart the infection=relapse. "

dm

[drummerman]

The part I don't really understand about SVR and viral loads is why is it that SVR12 was not sufficient to declare "cured" with the old tx (INF/riba) but it is with the new? I mean, if the patient has zero virus detected at EOT, and is still zero 12 weeks later (SVR12), then why would the virus be able to stage a comeback after that with INF treatment but it apparently cannot (or at least very rarely) with new all-oral treatment?

kim

good question... not sure , but I think it has something  to do with the new drugs making the virus have a more difficult time replicating mutant strains. 

But can't remember if I read that or just imagined it.

d

[annajustanna]

hi everyone - Just came back from apt with PA. I was lil depressed as I expected her to say Undetectable. She didn't though she said Detectible at low titer. she said they may want me to continue on for addl. months. My VL at start 9110000* and now is 32 (A)  Undetected  range IU/mL. I am still confused about this he said I am still detectable but letter received says undetectable range?? Can anyone help me understand better. Also I had treatment before - shots for 5 months. I cleared and got off as soon as I could against MD advice and then dreaded relapse within 3 months. My liver enzymes are WNL first time in yrs. I had news of non A or B in 75" Diagnosed with C yrs later. Had it now for 40+ yrs. Don't care for this PA. She was in a hurry and every question I asked I felt like she just wanted me to hurry up. She didn't even ask How I was feeling. Didnt even palpate liver to see if could feel swelling. This is like the 8th time they have tried to get me to sign form consenting to them passing my information electronically to other medical hospitals. I am an RN at another hospital and No I don't want them having my consent to give my info to anyone unless it is a need to know basis. They are starting EPIC system up here and want to be able to transfer info electronically from hospital to hospital. Uggghhhhhh - Breathe - This too shall pass -

[gnatcatcher]

annajustanna, congratulations on having liver enzymes WNL again! If your VL went from over 9 million to 32, that's very good for 5 weeks of treatment. In the wording "32 (A) Undetected," the (A) probably means Abnormal, and the Undetected probably means that Undetected is what is considered to be normal. In your case, the test counted 32 IU/mL of Hep C virus, which is extremely low but still higher than Undetected.

Which genotype are you? Which treatment are you on, and for how many weeks? If you're on Harvoni, given that you're "treatment experienced" (you tried a previous treatment), if you have cirrhosis (F4), you're supposed to take Harvoni for 24 weeks, which makes your odds of a cure really high and odds of a relapse extremely low. Some of us cirrhotics who fall into the 12-week protocol because we're "treatment naive" wish we could get 24 weeks to increase our odds of a cure.

Gnatty

[annajustanna]

Hi Gnatty - Thanks for the reply! Genotype is 1A and without cirrhosis. US showed  Fatty Liver but like I told the MD - I am overweight - I would expect that. I am on Harvoni for 12 weeks. I just am acutely aware that there are side effects to everything but I don't want to get off it too early like I did last time around. There is so much shame associated with this disease.  I just want it gone. Gnatty - you and others seem to have such a positive attitude. I need some of that right now.
Thanks again!!!!!

[gnatcatcher]

annajustanna, sorry for assuming cirrhosis in your case -- the fact that your PA wanted you to continue for more months than originally planned had me confused, so I thought maybe cirrhosis was detected after you began treatment, thus lengthening it from 12 to 24 weeks. Glad to learn you don't have cirrhosis.

As for side effects, compared to previous treatments, very few people have bad enough ones from Harvoni to discontinue treatment. I've had only trivial side effects during these first nine weeks.

If someone tries to shame me, I consider it the shamer's problem, not mine. Life is always to some extent a game of chance. When I was diagnosed, the CDC was estimating 300,000 cases of Hep C; now the estimate is ten times that. We have lots of company -- as these forums prove, lots of terrific company! Someone who shames others is usually not a very happy person, but there's no shortage of happy people here.

The odds of a cure with Harvoni are very high, and quite a few new cures will soon be available for those of us who relapse. My other "ace in the hole" is that, having had my first major diagnosis at age 20, I long ago accepted that I'm mortal. Overcoming the fear of death removes a huge obstacle from living a joyous life.

There are plenty of "up" posts on these forums, and you've already learned to avoid the downers. Every good wish,

Gnatty

[Bree]

Re:  Viral Load - Here's what mine says:
**
Component   Standard Range   Your Value
HCV PCR Quant       Not detected
HCV Viral Log       Not detected
HCV Qual Interp       Negative
Range of quantitation: 15-100,000,000 IU/mL (1.176-8.000 log IU/mL)
Expected result: NOT DETECTED
Methodology: Real-time PCR, Roche COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS Taqman
**
Drummerman, it looks like I have the same test as you.  Does yours have the HCV Qual Interp?  That seems to be to be saying quan not detected, and also is interpreting a negative qualitative?  Or maybe it's testing for both? So, I think it might be close to the same thing at this point in regard to testing.

My doctor, no nonsense kind of guy... only wanted to test at 4 weeks into treatment, at EOT and at 24 weeks EOT (which I think is protocol)... I requested an additional test 12 weeks after completion of treatment and he agreed to.

All I know is I'll be happy with those results all day and all night for the rest of my life...please! 

[Bree]

Hi Anna (short for annajustanna) ~

I'm on 12 weeks Harvoni non-cirrhosis (which is in and of itself miraculous) and was pre-treated/relapsed also.  I think the odds are majorly in our favor!  I have 3 weeks to go... I'm enjoying the journey at this point.

I'm doing everything I know to stay as positive as I can ... I took a dip mid-treatment and have since tailored what I pay attention to for my own well-being. 

One thing that is helpful if you feel like doing it... if you go to your profile and put in the signature line your length of treatment, liver status, treatment drug, then it's easier to respond to questions sometimes.  You can look at a few to see how they are doing it.. and it's fun to update with UND! 

I feel like you are going to be just fine! 

[drummerman]

Re:  Viral Load - Here's what mine says:
**
Component   Standard Range   Your Value
HCV PCR Quant       Not detected
HCV Viral Log       Not detected
HCV Qual Interp       Negative
Range of quantitation: 15-100,000,000 IU/mL (1.176-8.000 log IU/mL)
Expected result: NOT DETECTED
Methodology: Real-time PCR, Roche COBAS Ampliprep/COBAS Taqman
**
Drummerman, it looks like I have the same test as you.  Does yours have the HCV Qual Interp?  That seems to be to be saying quan not detected, and also is interpreting a negative qualitative?  Or maybe it's testing for both? So, I think it might be close to the same thing at this point in regard to testing.

My doctor, no nonsense kind of guy... only wanted to test at 4 weeks into treatment, at EOT and at 24 weeks EOT (which I think is protocol)... I requested an additional test 12 weeks after completion of treatment and he agreed to.

All I know is I'll be happy with those results all day and all night for the rest of my life...please!

Mine simply says:

HCV RT-PCR, Quant (graph)
      Hepatitis C Quantitation <15
       HCV RNA detected

Test Information - The quantitative  range of the assay is 15 IU/mL to 100 million IU/ml.
Using COBAS(R) TaqMan (R) HCV test, v 2.0.  The limit of detection (LOD) and lower limit of quantification  range of the assay will be reported  as "HCV RNA detected, less than 15 IU/mL"

My lab is called LabCorp in Dallas.

Now if I keep getting this same result with the same machine , is it not possible that I could be at say 1 IU/mL,  or 2, or 3, .. since this machine can not measure below 15.  Now if this machine saw no HCV RNA would this specific machine be able to report "No HCV RNA detected."?

Is anyone else getting this same test (COBAS TagMan v 2.0) and being told by their nurse that they are UND??

dm

[Bree]

My lab is in Austin.  I would ask your doctor to interpret the results for you as it is confusing and causing you stress.

[drummerman]

will do bree.

dm

[annajustanna]

Bree - Thanks for the direction. And Congrats to you. Its terrific!!!! Hopefully at 8 weeks I will be undetected too. Blessings to all.....

[KimInTheForest]

Mine simply says:

HCV RT-PCR, Quant (graph)
      Hepatitis C Quantitation <15
       HCV RNA detected

<snip>

Is anyone else getting this same test (COBAS TagMan v 2.0) and being told by their nurse that they are UND??

My reading of this, drummerman, is that it is incorrect for a nurse or anyone else to tell you you are "undetected" as long as the lab results still say "HCV RNA detected". You are very close to being undetected. But a point will come when your lab results change and actually say HCV RNA  "undetected". I agree with Bree that it would be best to ask your doctor to clarify this. I think the nurse is not really being accurate if she is, in fact, saying you are undetected. Maybe I misread your statement. Maybe the nurse didn't tell you you are undetected.

It's still a very good result regardless. But I think it will get even better for you, maybe on your very next test.

best,
kim

[drummerman]

yep, she used the word "undetected" twice.

maybe this machine can actually register "UND" once it gets to that point.. but I don't think it can and will ask my doctor to order a more sensitive   qualitative test at EOT.

and see what he says.

dm

[Bree]

annajustanna - great job on the signature - For what it's worth - one more tip if you want to add in dates of treatment that helps others also, ex. Start date of Harvoni. When it says 5 weeks yesterday, is that 5 weeks on treatment and what was that date? Because this will be your signature until you change it and without dates every time you post it will read like 5 weeks yesterday.  People can respond better if they understand.  If that makes sense... Not trying to tell you what to do and do what you want... someone helped me with signature and I appreciated it.

[gnatcatcher]

annajustanna, thanks very much for adding the signature -- it helps a lot.
Bree, thanks for suggesting it to annajustanna. Your text quote is great!

[luccagirl]

Hi

The explanation of the viral load drop was helpful i am concerned because my three week test (on 8 week regime) went from 5m to 54..but technically i'm one of the 5%
that doesn't clear completely by 3-4 weeks..so i ended up asking for another month
which they are giving me.  I will test again at 8 and hope to be clear and then take the extra month anyway.

F1
1a
previously untreated

my liver enzymes had not dropped at ALL by 3 weeks and this was what prompted me to politic for more Harvoni.

[luccagirl]

Hi

The explanation of the viral load drop was helpful i am concerned because my three week test (on 8 week regime) went from 5m to 54..but technically i'm one of the 5%
that doesn't clear completely by 3-4 weeks..so i ended up asking for another month
which they are giving me.  I will test again at 8 and hope to be clear and then take the extra month anyway.

F1
1a
previously untreated

my liver enzymes had not dropped at ALL by 3 weeks and this was what prompted me to politic for more Harvoni.

[gnatcatcher]

Hi, luccagirl --

Glad you were able to get approval for the third bottle. You are smart to take the extra month even if you clear at 8 weeks, because the longer treatment has a reduced relapse rate for treatment-naive non-cirrhotic subjects like yourself -- in the clinical trials, only 1% (3 out of 216) on the 12-week treatment relapsed vs. 5% (11 out of 215) on the 8-week treatment.

Best wishes to you.

Gnatty

[Bree]

Yes, I agree with Gnatty.  My doc prescribes a minimum 12 week or longer for Harvoni no matter what the circumstances (treatment naive, non-cirrhosis) as it increases the cure rate.  He said even slightly, who wants to be in that 1-2 percentile difference.  Doesn't mean he will get it but he prescribes it that way anyway.

[Richelieu]

My VL after two weeks is below linear range of the array witch is 15 IU/mL from 900000.
There are any statistics that shows if you're clear after three months you are cured and you don't have to check and worry at six months one year or later?

[luccagirl]

Hi

I just got my 8 week results back, finally undetected, at 4 i had dropped from 5m-54..i have another month
of Harvoni..but my liver enzymes are still the same, anyone else have this problem?

[gnatcatcher]

luccagirl, congratulations on the undetected. In another post, you wrote, "liver enzymes remained elevated but not super high." It is odd that they haven't dropped at all, but if they were close to normal to begin with, I wonder how significant the lack of a drop is.

Various liver enzyme results can signify many things, not just hepatitis. You may find this web site helpful in formulating questions to ask your doctor:
http://labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/liver-panel/tab/test

Gnatty

[luccagirl]

Hi Thank you

They have always referred to them as mildly
elevated

ALT 46
AST 43

but they have been consistent and haven't dropped at all.  They had normalized after almost a year on Dr. Zhang's chinese herb program but were elevated after i had chemo for breast cancer..no one seems concerned at the numbers but still..it bothers me.

Even though i had F1 fibroscan number it seems my original viral load of 5m is higher than other people too..i guess it's not a linear correlation, thanks again!

[gnatcatcher]

luccagirl, thanks for telling me the actual values. Your report should also contain a "reference range" or "normal range" for each test. If you look at the lab results below my name, you'll see that I have had liver enzymes tested at two different labs that had different reference ranges.

I had to wait many years for a hepatitis treatment that I could tolerate. During that time, my ALT and AST kept climbing, but my primary doctor said he wouldn't worry unless they became FIVE TIMES normal. If your doctor isn't worried, you needn't be worried either.

Indeed, viral load and amount of fibrosis don't seem to be correlated. Viral loads are very unpredictable -- mine has bounced around, with a high of more than 9 million, but that was after a test where it had dropped to around 1/2 million. And things other than hepatitis can affect the amount of fibrosis a person has.

You seem to be in good shape: undetected viral load, and satisfactory ALT and AST.

Gnatty

[Cal]

Well done Luccagirl,
Great V/
L drop. Your LFTS are fine. Some get huge elevations but SVR just fine. I was 9 mill to 54 in 2 weeks. So you didn't  have a high V/L.  Cal 

[Cal]

Hi Richeleu,

I'm not sure what you're on. I'm on V Pak. But you've had a great drop. Allegedly 99% of those with UND at EOT will SVR. SVR seems to be done 12 weeks after EOT, well that's for V Pak anyway. Cal

[annajustanna]

sooo very happy - I'm dancing on the coffee table. VL UNDETECTED on day 50 of harvoni. Liver enzymes up abit from last month though but sooo happy!!! Thanks for helping keep up my spirits all when I was worried about still being detectable at 24 days. I hope we all get there.   

[Bree]

Congrats Annajustanna!  Feels great doesn't it? !!!!

[annajustanna]

feels wonderful. - amazing but hoping the extra energy and clearing of brain fog stays with me.  And I have lost 14 lbs from healthy eating. This has been a good year! Now I will say a prayer for SVR. 

[Bree]

Wow.  14 pounds!  I lost 3 and happy with that

Things may wax and wane a bit and maybe not, for me, I ride the wave when it's there;)

[gnatcatcher]

sooo very happy . . .

Me, too -- GREAT news!