Re: ION results
Isn't it a little harsh to think that the 8-week regimen is out the window because of a 3.7% difference in SVR (1.4% if we stay within ION-3)?
And is RBV and all that comes with it really absolutely needed for the 2.8% extra that it brings in ION-2?
Your threshold for significant/meaningful appears very low in the above, esp. considering how little importance you attach to the extra 5.5% from going to 24 weeks in ION-2. Why the double standard? Cost implications cannot be the explanation - as you pointed out many times, GILD can do a cap program instead of charging double for the 24 week durations.
Again, are we reading too much into numerical differences based on N=100/200 trial arms? Are these differences statistically significant? Are they clinically meaningful? Or can we simply conclude from all this that 8 weeks is good enough for naïves and 12 weeks is good enough for experienced and you don't need RBV with either?
PS: I do agree that once we know sub-population data (cirrhotics, subtype, HIV, etc.) then some patients may need longer durations.
Dew-pls delete earlier duplicate post