TOPIC:

Can anyone describe to me what he has done fibroskan.
In Belgrade, (where my score was 16.3 kPa), the doctor asked me to transfer my right leg over left leg, raise your right hand above his head and throw rib part the best I can. At any moment, when he worked with FibroScan, sought to keep my air and not breathing.

In Sofia, the doctor told me to just lie down comfortably, move right hand , and relax. I did not have that ejects rib part to him, to cease to breathe or anything else. The result was 10.2 kPa.
I mentioned when I made the first examination (in Belgrade), I had a virus, and I was completely hoarse, I could hardly talk. (I do not know whether it could affect the result FibroScan)

For GT1a 12 weeks Twinvir without Ribavirin gives you a 97% chance of SVR with or without cirrhosis.

1a, F0-3: ION-1 98% (142/145) ION-3 96% 96% (165/172) Aggregate 96.8% (307/317)

For F4, here is the data:

w12: {
svr: 97,
trials: 'ION-1 97% (32/33)'
},
w12riba: {
svr: 100,
trials: 'ION-1 100% (33/33)'
},
w24: {
svr: 97,
trials: 'ION-1 97% (31/32)'
},
w24riba: {
svr: 100,
trials: 'ION-1 100% (36/36)'
}

w12 == 12 weeks, w12riba == 12 weeks with Riba, w24 == 24 weeks, w24riba == 24 weeks with Riba.

So the entire F4 trials data is based on 134 people of whom exactly 2 failed. You can't make any statistically valid assertions on that data to say +Riba is better. Note than in a recent n=468 trails of Sof+Dac+/-Riba in GT3 F4 patients all the patients who took Riba did WORSE than those who did not.

If I understand correctly, genotype 1a, if it does not take ribavirin, there is no difference in quality between 12 and 24 weeks.
Is it the same for genotype 1b?
I bought twinvir for 24 weeks of therapy, ribavirin for me is now unavailable.
I do not know whether we subtype a or b. It was never established, and given that I have already begun treatment question is whether it is possible to determine.
Is it possible on the basis of the PCR test after 2 weeks and 12 weeks take a decision on the length of therapy? Or take TVINVIR 24 weeks and that's it?
What is your opinion?

Yes,

I have the same question, it is only for 1a?

Why Gilead then recommends 24 weeks Harvoni for F4? They want to sell more?

I started with 10.4 on my fibroscan and my doctor said it was F3, not F3/F4. I wish I could someone could post a clear numerical guide to the F's for hep c people. I actually just started a thread asking the same question...

For treatment naive it 12wks or 24 wks does not make a difference (page 18)

While for treatment-experience it makes a little bit


Find yourself here

depts.washington.edu/hepstudy/presentati...ofosbuvir_master.pdf

Thanks for that, but I am colour blind. I would love to see the numerical listings for the different F's in numbers and not coloured charts...

Should have mentioned that this is more out of interest for fibrosis in the liver than for different cure rate scenarios from the HCV

kenbasman
You are tx naive so you need only three months lesovir c for 97% cure or 12 weeks + Ribavirin for 100% cure rate.

Hi kenbasman, psavic,

There is a conversion chart on relating Kpa numbers (liver stiffness) to F-scores here:

fixhepc.com/getting-treated/how-to-do-it/doctors.html

In my opinion, Fibroscan only gives a rough indication of the F-score... I had one done, and I'm sure if a different nurse did the test or if it was done on a different day then the Kpa number would probably have been a bit different. But compared to having a biopsy (sample of liver extracted with a terrifying-looking needle) it is non-invasive.

Little personal story:

I also had a liver biopsy done. My specialist told be that he normally does it under a general anaesthetic (for the patient not for him ), because apparently it can sometimes be painful. But because I didn't know better, I turned up at the clinic having had a full breakfast and he refused to give me a general anaesthetic. So he gave me a local anaesthetic instead, and then did the biopsy while I watched (no pain at all). Weird experience!

In the end, the biopsy showed F0, but the Fibroscan showed F0/F1. Which one was more accurate? Most probably the biopsy. But maybe the sample came from a still-healthy bit of the liver? Or more likely, the fact that I also have a couple of harmless cysts in the liver threw off the fibroscan result a bit. The cysts are just filled with fluid, so they will have a different density from the rest of the liver...

...

Probably everyone on the forum will agree that the F-score should only be used as a rough guide for how many weeks of treatment should be followed, and not as a justification for ware-housing people who are infected with a seriously dangerous virus....

yes fibroscan should only be seen as a rough guide. Elastography is accurate to a much bigger extent

really, i have done Elastography and resulted F1. I thought they are the same

FibroScan® is the brand name for a particular transient elastography machine but has become the generalised name for the procedure.

Here is some general reading about the process and variations in accuracy:

www.racgp.org.au/afp/2013/july/fibroscan/

And research data summary comparing biopsy and fibroscan.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25528010

Thanks. i will stop hogging psavic's progress now. Sorry about that. Psavic, I hope you are feeling way better now that you are almost a week in to your meds! I only interrupted your post because your doctor told you that at 10.2 you were F3/F4 and my doctor told me that with 10.4 I was F3. I don't know if they use other factors to get to their conclusions but it here is a chart someone graciously posted for me in my own topic about this:

Vororo wrote 'Probably everyone on the forum will agree that the F-score should only be used as a rough guide for how many weeks of treatment should be followed, and not as a justification for ware-housing people who are infected with a seriously dangerous virus...."

Absolutely Vororo. I just wanted to know the numbers for my personal knowledge. Thanks for your answer!