Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Letter to the editor re: Assessing the validity of surrogate endpoints in the context of a controversy about the measurement of effectiveness of hepatitis C virus treatment
  1. Ronald L Koretz1,
  2. Janus Christian Jakobsen2,
  3. Christian Gluud2
  1. 1 Department of Medicine, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, Sylmar, California, USA
  2. 2 Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group, Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen, Denmark
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ronald L Koretz, Department of Medicine, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, Sylmar, CA 91342, USA; rkoretz{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

After describing the formal methodology for validating surrogate outcomes, Dobler and colleagues conditionally recommend that since there is convincing evidence that direct-acting agents do produce sustained viral responses (SVRs) in patients treated for chronic hepatitis C, such treatment ‘may be appropriate’.1 They did recognise that the SVR, a surrogate outcome, has never been formally validated, but they came to their recommendation anyway based on a strong association between SVRs and important clinical outcomes and a single randomised clinical trial (RCT) of debatable quality that interferon (IFN)-based …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement This letter does not contain any original research.