Guest guest Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 In retrospect, I think it would have been wise to pay attention to your nausea as a warning that you should try to find less toxic drugs. In 1997 you had a choice of Crixivan rather than Norvir and Saquinavir. Yes, hindsight is always 20/20. Like many of us long term survivors, I'd been taking every new drug that came out--starting with AZT--in a desperate bid to stay alive. PCP nearly killed me in '92. By '97 I'd already had a lot of NRTI resistance, and as a result failed my first nelfinavir regimen. I had tried Crixivan earlier and got kidney stones, but due to my resistance profile, an unboosted protease wasn't gonna work for me anyway. I was lucky that my dr and I had read up on the saquinavir/ritonavir condo, which not approved in the treatment guidelines yet. It worked beautifully, and my CD4s have since risen from 2 to over 1100. Bottom line: we do what we have to with the information we have at the time--and hopefully it works... Best, Jeff in Palm Springs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 25, 2006 Report Share Posted October 25, 2006 In retrospect, I think it would have been wise to pay attention to yournausea as a warning that you should try to find less toxic drugs.In 1997 you had a choice of Crixivan rather than Norvir and Saquinavir.Today we know that Crixivan would have been a more effective antiviral,without the nausea caused by Norvir.I doubt that many people, at least those who actually treat patients, would endorse the choice of unboosted Crixivan over Ritonavir/Saquinavir at this point. Barrowpozbod@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2006 Report Share Posted October 26, 2006 "In 1997 you had a choice of Crixivan rather than Norvir and Saquinavir."And anyone TODAY who put someone on the original hard capsule saquinovir with ritonovir would be practicing GOOD MEDICINE. Hard gel caps give better levels than the later soft gel caps.Anyone who put a patient on Crixivan, unboosted, would be making a "controversial" call, today. at best."One's" personal experience is a fairly poor indicator of medical progress. Barrowpozbod@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2006 Report Share Posted October 28, 2006 All I can say is I'm very glad my Doctor didn't put me on full-dose Norvir in combination with full-dose Crixivan or Invirase. Even if a Doctor suggested that today, it would be peculiar at best. I will find out after Thanksgiving how I best escape the land of Norvir. We measured my trough Reyataz levels and bilirubin combining 400 mg Reyataz with 50 mg Norvir. We compare that with my current regimen of 800 mg Reyataz once daily next week. And then two weeks later, again check my trough Reyataz levels on 400 mg Reyataz twice a day. It will be interesting to see the results. The highest Reyataz dose there are toxicity reports for is some sad case who tried to kill himself by taking a one month supply of Reyataz all in one sitting. He experienced asymptomatic EKG irregularities for a few hours, but no other abnormalities or effects. I'm sure we'll find an overly effective dose well below the 24,000 mg per day level. After dropping the 50 mg Norvir, I lost the slight fatigue and headache I could only previously stop by dropping my Viread. Some studies show Norvir elevates Viread levels by 35%, while other studies show little change. In the bigger picture Norvir complicates the dosing of many drugs -- and I don't think its an ideal drug to be taking long term. In any event, I'm going to feel on safer footing with my liver being able to break down toxins in a normal manner without being hamstrung with Norvir degradation. >> "In 1997 you had a choice of Crixivan rather than Norvir and > Saquinavir."> > And anyone TODAY who put someone on the original hard capsule > saquinovir with ritonovir would be practicing GOOD MEDICINE. Hard > gel caps give better levels than the later soft gel caps.> > Anyone who put a patient on Crixivan, unboosted, would be making a > "controversial" call, today. at best.> > "One's" personal experience is a fairly poor indicator of medical > progress.> > > Barrow> pozbod@...> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.