Replies to post #30907 on Biotech Values

[rsox]

>>Medium risk in the treatment-naïve setting, and high risk in the treatment-refractory setting, IMO. The reason for this disparity is that the 200mg once-daily dose seems to be sufficient to reduce viral load in the treatment-naïve setting, but it is not enough to reduce viral load in the treatment-refractory setting. Doses higher than 200mg/day may be problematic due to GI side effects. Regards, Dew<<

Dew, are GI side affect so unbearable that a treatment refractory patient will be willing to allow the hcv virus to continue its destructive course because of it?

my mother who has hcv would not be deterred from taking nm simply because of some simple GI side affects. she has endured the affects of other hcv treatments and would gladly put up with more if it allowed her liver to keep on functioning.

i have seen how willing she is to take anything and put up with side affects as long as the virus is contained, and although i agree that the simpler the drug is to take the more likely a patient would be to follow the recommended dosing instructions, this is another issue that would not keep her from stopping to take the drug, whether it is once a day, or three times a day, heck she's shoot it into herself if need be.

how difficult would you say these GI side affects be to manage?
your high risk and medium risk assessment seem to say that you do not believe novartis nor idenix might be able to find a way around the GI affects and thus limiting the usage for their hcv candidate (nm-283) to the lower dose range.