I don't really see the point in putting together a collection of somewhat contradictory statements about construct efficacy and potential at this juncture. I think that the jury is still well and truly out when it comes to fully evaluating the relevance of either pre-formed or newly formed anti AAV-8 antibodies but if as you have stated AAV-8 based constructs are already working well in other clinical scenarios then Kay's previous comments don't seem to have all that much clinical revelance right now.
So why is TT-034 too little too late? I have yet to see evidence showing that compliance issues related to the use of orally-administered multiple-dose alternatives have been resolved. My guess is that the purveyors of these agents don't even know how many doses of a multi-dose preparation a patient can miss out on before the treatment loses its short-term clinical effectiveness. Peter French alluded to these issues a while back and I believe he is correct in his assessment of the downside associated with current oral treatments for Hep C. If governments are going to subsidise curative but expensive Hep C treatments then they may eventually elect to go with the product that offers a confirmed one-shot treatment that will either be curative or else hold the disease at bay for a prolonged period. Which is what TT-034 (and any future analogues) will provide.
BLT Price at posting:
78.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
