A few comments on the website and related generic initiative:

1. The website is really well set-up, with very accessible information.
2. The advice re prolongation of treatment based on HCV viral load monitoring is incorrect. There is no relationship between on-treatment monitoring and treatment outcome (assuming high level adherence, as in clinical trials). In fact, many patients in clinical trials have had “detectable” HCV RNA at end-of-treatment and still achieve sustained viral clearance. There is clearly no relationship between week 4 (or other timepoints) and sustained viral clearance, so extending treatment duration (as we did with interferon-based treatment) does not make sense in the interferon-free era, including in the case described below.
3. HCV RNA monitoring is probably only useful for adherence monitoring (or purity monitoring in case of generics). So, would still advise a week 4 HCV viral load, based on adherence/purity monitoring.
4. Treatment duration may need to be longer (24 weeks), based on pre-treatment factors (e.g. SOF/LDV or SOF/DCV for GT1 cirrhosis treatment experienced; SOF/DCV for GT3 cirrhosis treatment naive and experienced).
5. It is very important that the only patients that use SOF/ribavirin 12 weeks are those with GT2 (and possibly GT4 for 24 weeks). It is a sub-optimal regimen for GT1 and GT3.
6. The field is moving so quickly at present that there is a real need to keep updating. The AASLD/IDSA guidelines are probably the most frequently updated, and should soon have guidance on SOF/DCV. EASL guidelines are good for SOF/DCV.

I do understand patients desperation

* Comment – the site content has been corrected in line with point 2