HCV -- Asked Often Answered Here

Labels: abbreviations, debbullan, definitions, hcv, hep c, HIV, statistics

From an international study in 1999 through a 10 year study completed in 2004 to CDC statements unchanged since mid 2009 to a NIH supported website copyrighted this year, Hepatitis C is consistently reported not as a STD but as a disease whose transmission via sexual intercourse is not effective through monogamous, non violent means.

It is true that HCV can rarely be transmitted during intercourse as described above however; the virus is not designated by any official scientific entity a “Sexually Transmitted Disease”

Your personal research is always requested. Should you find scientifically supported statements to the contrary, this information would be welcomed. Until that time individuals reporting HCV to be a STD are to be proactively educated and questioned regarding their sources or motives.


1999 –Scientific Study / Australia
“Even long-term spouses seem not to be at increased risk. We therefore suggest that the risk of HCV transmission between monogamous sex partners does not depend on the duration of sexual exposure.”

“Our study finds no convincing evidence for the heterosexual transmission of hepatitis C”

http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/92/9/505?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=Lack+of+evidence+for+the+heterosexual+transmission+of+hepatitis+C&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT


PubMed / U.S. National Library of Medicine / National Institutes of Health
“Lack of evidence of sexual transmission of hepatitis C among monogamous couples: results of a 10-year prospective follow-up study.” May 2004
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15128350


CDC – Page last updated: June 9, 2009 – “Hepatitis C FAQs for Health Professionals”
“HCV can also be spread infrequently through sex with an HCV-infected person (an inefficient means of transmission)”
http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/HCV/HCVfaq.htm#section2


NIH via National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (http://www.nichd.nih.gov/womenshealth/research/disorders/stdhiv.cfm) offers information regarding Sexually Transmitted Disease. They provide a link to the National STD Hotline. Following links specifically toward Hepatitis and sexual transmission lands here: http://www.ashastd.org/learn/learn_hepatitisC.cfm Statement from this web page Copyright 1999 / 2010:

“Hepatitis C can be spread by vaginal or anal sex, but this does not occur very often (see "Reduce Your Risk" section below). Factors found to be associated with sexual transmission of HCV are: sex with multiple partners, presence of other STDs, or sex with trauma (for example, rough sex, rape, or sexual abuse).”

End Links

**Special Note of Appreciation to Terrie Lenhart, Director of Debbullan Inc. and Bill Remak, Chairman, National Association of Hepatitis Task Forces for additional links provided.

Labels: cdc, debbullan, hcv, nih, std, studies

Researchers are focusing in on "when treatment can be most effective" sometimes without knowing it. Following, for your good information, are comments regarding the studies making big news on the HCV Industry News Wire.

(This is a fictitious label. Your suggestions are welcome on an official label [think acronym] that should be adopted!).



In this comparison study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), the focus was to uncover if one pharmaceutical brand of HCV treatment was better than another. The answer was no but the results are halting. Where we have been told there is a 50% "clear rate" (or SVR = Sustained Viral Response) in current treatment we find now that there is only an overall 30% to 40% SVR in the treatment success. That epiphany dragged kicking and screaming aside, here is the reference to the finding of when treatment is most effective: "Among the patients with undetectable HCV RNA levels at treatment weeks 4 and 12, a sustained virologic response [SVR] was achieved in 86.2% and 78.7%, respectively."


In this Australian study (The Chariot Study) the initial focus was to test SVR results if higher doses of medicine were given for a shorter duration of time. That result was wholly negative however what was learned:

1) Patients with no or little liver fibrosis present before treatment began obtained SVR up 64% of the time.

2) As in the 'Comparison Study' (NEJM), landmarks were noted in specific periods of time during the treatment. Specifically, weeks 4, 8 and 12. If HCV RNA was not detectable in these weeks, the patient was most likely to achieve SVR up to 74% of the time.*

This study incites a real push in the need to treat early. The challenge may lay in the fact that insurers have criteria of when to treat. The current model is built on a 'wait to treat' expenditure. Studies like the below attempt to change that ideology.


This a study released by Duke University. It identifies the IL28B gene and points to proof that patients with the gene have more than a two fold chance for achieving SVR than those without it. The most exciting news discovered is that this helps explain the reason people of African decent do not respond to the standard treatment (30% SVR is normal compared to the 40-50% norm).**








This image was offered for download within the text of the study



The IL28B gene is found to only exist mainly in people of European decent. The lesson learned here helps people make an informed decision of whether to treat or not. Natalie Cole recently was forced to stop treatment after only approximately 8 weeks (standard treatment length is 48 weeks) when she suffered complete kidney failure. She received a kidney transplant in May of this year. Speculation can be made, if Miss Cole, who should have been informed she had only a 30% chance of SVR, also knew she did not have the IL28B gene would she have still chosen to attempt treatment? Would you?

!! Important to note that the Duke Univ study was financially underwritten largely by the pharmaceutical company, Schering-Plough. Also seven different consultants and other advisors of this study are inventors of a patent application based on the final result of the study.*** !!

In conclusion, the below quotation from an article (http://tinyurl.com/kughn5) published in Canada 9 months ago, sums up nicely why the subject of focusing future funding on more studies surrounding successful treatment landmarks is an intelligent approach to serving the sufferers of Hepatitis C.

"The side effects of the medicines to treat hepatitis C are terrible," Tavis said. "Why beat on a patient for a year if the treatment isn't going to work anyway?

"On the other hand, if we know the medicine is likely to work, we can coax patients to stick with the therapy [through the side effects]. It would help doctors to positively support their patients through trying times."


Disclaimers:

~All treatment data offered above is related to the Geno types 1~

~Debbullan Inc. is not a medical institution. Debbullan Inc. does not recommend particular treatments for specific individuals under any circumstance. In all cases we strongly recommend that you consult your physician to develop a well-informed decision before pursuing any course of treatment.~

Footnotes:

*Make note: News of The Chariot Study was obtained by a constituent in Australia, who responded to our post of The Comparison Study in NEJM with the Chariot article published by Hepatitis Central [dot com].

**Nod to the new statistic offered by The Comparison study. Check back for updates.

***This Australian study also mentions amazing new information found because of the IL28B gene. We are looking into the coincidence.
**Update - Regarding our repeated requests of affiliated funding via Shering Plough addressed to the Univ of Australia went unanswered. We were directed to one of the leaders of the study, Dr. David Booth who had since left the University. Following new contact directions, we were told by the recipient that they were unable to help us directly contact Dr. Booth. Having exhausted reasonable expense and time to achieve a definitive answer, we leave the disclaimer above.

There are 5 million Americans and 200 million people world wide with the disease. To suggest there is a cure is to minimize the suffering these victims of Hep C endure.

To begin at the end: [quote] To recap: The current treatment for Hep C can ~cure~ 50% of patients that are Geno 1 -- that attempt it -- that are not Black or Hispanic -- that can endure and/or afford the life altering, life threatening treatment side effects for a period of one to two years and maintain that ~cured~ status for another 2 years.

In closing: If you are not in this ~cured~ category you are called a -non responder- and there is no ~cure~ for you. [unquote]

To begin: The current treatment is considered a ~cure~ IF You can maintain treatment (for one to two years) some of which side effects are listed here:
~Near death unrelated illness brought about by treatment
~Unable to function at the work place
~Psychosis
~On the disclosure list of one popular drug treating Hep C right now there are 19 sentences, each one filled with side affects. The 19th sentence explains that not all the side effects have been listed. And I have not addressed the "Warning" section.

So, get through that 1-2 year treatment, then achieve ~Sustain Viral Response~ (SVR) for another 2 years and you are considered ~cured~ to some (not all) medical doctors. Some (of the few) doctors who believe this to be a cure have written articles about it in the New England Journal of Medicine. Doctors with opposing views have also written articles on the subject in the New England Journal of Medicine.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's break this achievement of ~cured~ down to reality for the average US Hepatitis C victim:

1) Regarding SVR The current blood tests for HCV can only detect the disease to a certain point. With the current treatment the virus can be pushed below this point and the patient becomes SVR. At anytime while SVR, undetectable reactions can take place that allow the virus to multiply and become detectable again. Take note, within the last 6 years if a patient could maintain SVR for 1 year they were considered ~cured~ Now the bar has been raised to 2 years. It is a logical assumption to make that enough patients relapsed from SVR to have the medical community move the bar.

2) Common Genotype in America The most common Genotype in America is Genotype 1. The current treatment available to patients of Hep C (Geno 1) obtain SVR 50%** of the time if you are NOT African American OR Latino, OR Mexican OR Hispanic (these cultures respond 20-30 % of the time to treatment, when ~they~ can endure and/or afford treatment).
**This 50% is not for the entire population of Hep C victims but only the patients that have been brave enough (or have the monetary means) to try it. If every single Hep C victim were given the means to ~attempt~ the treatment, this 50% figure would most definitely change. No one knows in which direction.

To recap: The current treatment for Hep C can ~cure~ 50% of patients that are Geno 1 -- that attempt it -- that are not Black or Hispanic -- that can endure and/or afford the life altering, life threatening treatment side effects for a period of one to two years and maintain that ~cured~ status for another 2 years.

In closing: If you are not in this ~cured~ category you are called a -non responder- and there is no ~cure~ for you.

• Surveys and Epidemiology surveillance reports have made it universally agreed that the percentage hepatitis C is transmitted through sexual intercourse range from 3% to 15%. The least likely transference beginning with sexually monogamous partners.
• Remember to use barrier methods of contraception (eg, condoms, diaphragms). Oral contraceptives do not protect you from sexually transmitted diseases. Hepatitis C is transmitted from the blood of the infected.

Can hepatitis C Be transmitted From Mother to Child?

Seven studies published between 1992 and 2000 were revisited in 2001. Language was not restriction:in utero. Confirming research continues.

• HIV/HCV co infection raised percentage of transmission from 3.5% up to 22%
• Intravenous Drug Use raised transmission from 3.4% to 10.8%
• Mode of Delivery as well as breast feeding transmission studies require standardization in study however at the time show no real change in transmission possibility.
• Information available in 2008 shows no difference suggesting transmission to unborn children among non high-risk-mothers remain at just over 3%. High risk occupations behavior and circumstances can be found here: http://www.debbullan.org/high_risk.htm

Extrapolated data: Between 10,000 to 60,000 newborn babies will be infected with HCV each year due to Mother to child transmission.

How long after exposure to HCV does it take to test positive for anti-HCV?

• According to the CDC (Center for Disease Control, Atlanta, Georgia USA): "A single positive PCR test indicates infection with HCV.A single negative test does not prove that a person is not infected. Virus may be present in the blood and just not found by PCR.When hepatitis C is suspected and PCR is negative, PCR should be repeated."
  People at high risk for Hep C should test regularly. Testing options can be found here: http://www.debbullan.org/HCV_Testing.htm
• For more information regarding testing for HCV, Cigna Healthwise (Health Insurance Company) answers questions about testing as well as about the procedure itself Find the link here: http://www.cigna.com/healthinfo/tw9921.html

How long after exposure to HCV does it take to test positive with PCR? PCR: (Polymerase Chain Reaction) A technique to produce enough DNA to be adequately tested for disease causing viruses.

• It is possible to find HCV within 1 to 2 weeks after being infected with the virus.Source: cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/c/faq.htm#t8

Is Stem Cell Research a Research Avenue For Hepatitis C?

• Research in gene transfer technology to battle hepatitis C as well as liver regeneration to reverse the damage done by the virus is moving forward. Debbullan Inc. is searching for professional liaise in this field. Email Debbullan@cs.com to help make a difference.

Can Hepatitis C Be Contracted By Repeated Use of a Syringe by The Same Person?

• "...Repeated use of the same syringe and needle by the same patient. If the patient does not have HCV he/she cannot get it from the syringe/needle. If the patient is being treated for HCV and clears the virus but continues to use the same syringe/needle he/she can re-infect himself/herself. The patient using the same syringe/needle is at risk for bacterial infections from using a dirty syringe/needle." Source: Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex Medical Professional

Above are the most commonly asked
questions of Debbullan Inc. If you have questions or comments contact Debbullan@cs.com

Debbullan Inc. is not a medical institution. Debbullan Inc. does not recommend particular treatments for specific individuals under any circumstance. In all cases we strongly recommend that you consult your physician before pursuing any course of treatment.

MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BE AWARE

EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE. NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE

http://www.debbullan.org/

# posted by Debbullan Inc. @ 12:09 AM 0 comments