At the recent EASL Meeting, Lawitz presented a paper on 24 weeks of Harvoni for previous treatment failures. The following comment caught my attention: ' Patients with no baseline NS-5A RAV's experienced 100% SVR12. Those with baseline RAV's reached SVR12 at 60%' . Also, it was found that 25% of treatment failures had the Sovaldi RAV S282T. Gilead have always maintained that S282T is not a problem. It obviously is, in the real world.
This raises the question: Should all treatment failures (with DAA's) be tested for NS-5A RAV's, prior to starting a new round of treatment? If RAV's are present, should they wait for the new Merck combo to be approved.
Very interesting stuff, Malcolm. Thanks
Hi all,
At the recent EASL Meeting, Lawitz presented a paper on 24 weeks of Harvoni for previous treatment failures. The following comment caught my attention: ' Patients with no baseline NS-5A RAV's experienced 100% SVR12. Those with baseline RAV's reached SVR12 at 60%' . Also, it was found that 25% of treatment failures had the Sovaldi RAV S282T. Gilead have always maintained that S282T is not a problem. It obviously is, in the real world.
This raises the question: Should all treatment failures (with DAA's) be tested for NS-5A RAV's, prior to starting a new round of treatment? If RAV's are present, should they wait for the new Merck combo to be approved.
http://www.healio.com/hepatology/hepatitis-c/news/online/%7B7800fe7d-b339-4eaa-93bb-339b6f74dfc4%7D/previous-treatment-failures-respond-to-24-weeks-of-harvoni
-- Edited by mallani on Sunday 26th of April 2015 03:06:55 AM