Biotech Values

[iwfal]

whether or not an SVR is as meaningful a predictor of long-term suppression without interferon will definitely need to be studied when non-inf regimens are studied. from a clinical and regulatory perspective though SVR is likely to remain the gold standard for efficacy and approval

1) Agree that SVR is likely to remain the standard - but see note #2

2) I suspect that the relapse rate after completion of therapy will be much higher. E.g. if ifn therapy gets 55% undetectable virus after 6 months of therapy and 15% relapse in the succeeding 6 months to get a 40% SVR then I suspect that anti-viral cocktails might get 95% undetectable after therapy but 40% relapse rate. Thus the early anti-viral cocktail data is interesting - but what I will find interesting is the long term followup.

Note - All of the above numbers are complete WAGs - and represent a position taken partly (and overassertively) to prevent complacency. But my point remains the same. There is a lot of 'common knowledge' in the HCV world that I find suspect - e.g. it is commonly accepted that HCV doesn't hide like HIV after a 'cure', but there is enough data out there to indicate this is probably not true.