>You're having that reading comprehension problem again. The problem I saw was that Tyzeka WAS included in the current AASLD guidelines , and was specifically declared deficient.<
Don’t be such a smartass—you know perfectly well that when I said “included” I meant included with a positive recommendation. You also know—or should know—that a negative recommendation by AASLD is typical for a new drug that does not receive a positive recommendation; i.e., AASLD does not typically ignore a new hepatitis drug that has received FDA approval by pretending that it does not even exist.
Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
The authors are many of the same group from Stanford who published the '06 treatment algorithm I mentioned in the post this one is in reply to. Some feel their influence doesn't carry much weight compared to , say , the AASLD guidelines , so even if Tyzeka is mentioned favorably , it might not help much. Still , it couldn't hurt.