I generally agree that Hep B seems to be further behind than Hep C and tougher to treat - so it is potentially a substantial market for a better ifn.
There’s little question that the HBV market offers the potential for larger $ sales per treated patient than the HCV market.
I would really like to understand why HVB chose to go with seroconversion as their primary metric and HCV chose to go with viral load.
In the absence of HBsAg seroconversion (not to be confused with HBeAg seroconversion), few if any patients have experienced a treatment response that can reasonably be characterized as a cure.
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated in any area of human knowledge!”