VX-950, Investigational Oral Hepatitis C Protease Inhibitor, Demonstrates Rapid

[Upbeat]

I know some people don't like the vx-950 posts. This is really to good not to post.



New data announced today by Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated VRTX show that VX-950, an investigational oral hepatitis C virus (HCV) protease inhibitor, dosed in combination with pegylated interferon alfa-2a (Pegasys(R); peg-IFN), achieved a rapid and dramatic reduction in plasma viral RNA levels in patients with chronic genotype 1 HCV infection. In this Phase Ib study, the combination of VX-950 and peg-IFN produced an initial median reduction in plasma HCV RNA of more than 3 log10 in the first two days, followed by continued decline to a median 5.5 log10 reduction in HCV RNA at day 14, which equates to a 300,000- fold reduction in viral levels. The majority of patients (6 of 8) receiving the combination achieved HCV RNA levels below the limit of quantitation (30 IU/mL, as measured by the Roche TaqMan(R) assay) at 14 days, with 4 of 8 patients achieving HCV RNA levels below the limit of detection (10 IU/mL, Roche TaqMan(R)). The antiviral activity of the combination through 14 days was significantly greater than the activity of VX-950 administered as a single agent, and much greater than peg-IFN alone. In addition, VX-950 appeared to be well-tolerated when dosed alone and in combination with peg-IFN in the study. The full data set will be presented at a medical conference later this year.

There is more to this story.  Only allowed 1600 Characters.  They do go on to say they are looking at only 3 Months for treatment.  That has got to be good news.

[cuteus]

You have a point. But I am not sure I like the idea of a moderator in the forum. That can be a little disruptive as well. MH tried to change things last yr by asking if folks would be willing to pay a small membership fee, perhaps to help with the upkeep of the site or maybe to open a monitor position, I don't know. In the end, we got the ads on the right side of the thread.
If it is not a paid position it might become what delphi now is, a system of banning anyone the person does not agree with or personally like. I definetely do not want to be scanned by someone and deemed to be too curt and thus offensive. And it could become that. If it can be done without it becoming axing due to personal likes, I am all for it.
MH has rules posted, if they can be enforced to the T, without subjective involvement, it might work. I just don't know how it can be done.

[Upbeat]

Wow You people really amaze me.  Why can't you take the news for what it is.  We can all read whatever we want into it. I for one like the fact that there has been good results so far.  Maybe it won't pan out. However so far so good, and getting better!

                                                      Ron

[couldn't think of a nickname]

I only caught part of it, I am sure it will be archived. Actually, considering it was short, I think I missed a majority of it. Usually those are archived within several hours or the next day.
hope you are feeling/doing well.

[jmjm530]

You're not the first person who has come to that conclusion. I post a lot less myself on controversial issues as well. Others like Rifleman have simply left the discussion group in disgust. In the end, we all suffer because less participation means less information. This is the real problem this discussion group has -- it's not the Calio2's or the Spacecoast's -- it's the disprectful and intimidating manner that many call "debate". BTW did you hear the Vertex webcast this morning? I didn't see it available yet on their website.

-- Jim

[couldn't think of a nickname]

Thanks, I think of my friends from here every day, even though I do not wish to be an active discussion participant. I decided against removing my name, and decided to exercise self-restraint from posting on controversial subjects. In the end, none of it matters, only time will tell for sure, and there is no way to change that.

[andyarundel]

Wow, such great work...What we have here is a poor variant of the strawman argument that is partly proactive. It involves the anticipation of counter arguments and the arguer offers preemptive rejoinders. This has some legitimacy as is, but it becomes fallacious when misused. If the user of this technique states that that he has already disproved a given argument because he disproved a similar argument in their preemptive rejoinder; that argument is a strawman, or in this case, some simple advice...Next time you go fishing, make sure you have the right bait, and some knowledge as to the species of the fish you "think" you may have caught would also be somewhat advisable. Then again, to argue that one's expertise or experience allows one to accurately intuit the correct answer to a question or determine the best course of action. This not disprovable and therefore can not be assessed by science. This is related to magical and wishful thinking.

See; Fantasia ot the amazing Randi