Jump to content


Photo

PCR #'s


  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 czkeidel@aol.com

czkeidel@aol.com

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 0 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 02:24 PM

Thanks for your responses to my questions about interpreting the PCR reports.

I have more info -- and re-took blood test today (so should know more next week) - In the meantime, would appreciate feedback about the following #'s (specifically, the decrease from June to October

PCR = .7 at diagnosis -- September 2010

PCR = 0.0196 in January 2011 -- -- report says log decrease from lab median ratio:2:0 -- log change from patient's previous result: 1.6 decrease -- Question: Is  0.0196 -- a 1 log or two log reduction??

PCR = 0.00109 in April 2011     (missing full report -- just have the PCR #) -- assume this is 2 log????

PCR = 0.00055 in June 2011 --  report says log decrease from lab median ratio: 3:6  -- then says it is "unchanged" from patient's previous result (0.00109) -- confusing because I thought three zeros after the decimal indicated 3 log???

***PCR = 0.00868 in October 2011 report says log decrease from lab diagnostic median ratio: 2.4 --  log change from patient's previous result: 1.6 decrease

***Question -- report says changes of less than 0.5 - 0.7 are not significant -- so 1.6 decrease from previous findings is probably not lab error -Assuming this - could it  be a sign that there are other mutations??  Or gleevec not working??  Or something else??

Thanks so much to everyone

Carole



#2 Trey

Trey

    Advanced Member

  • PS Beta Group
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,705 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio, Texas

Posted 02 November 2011 - 05:50 PM

Many people have a bumpy PCR track.  It does not mean your response is bumpy.  These numbers in log reductions are quite good.  Wait and see what the next PCR result is.  Otherwise, these numbers are not a cause for concern.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users