Dr.KarenChen said:The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Small molecule does not automatically mean cheap. Price is set by what the market will bear and by patent life, not by cost of goods, and I would not assume the savings reach patients.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. With resmetirom now available for MASH, combination approaches are being explored, so the standard of care in this area is moving faster than most threads assume.
Worth separating that from liver and MASH, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
KevinCompounds said:Small molecule does not automatically mean cheap.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Whether normalised enzymes tell you anything about fibrosis, and what the right follow-up measurement is?
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
For the archive: it took about six weeks rather than the two I expected, and the difference between those two numbers was the whole of my problem.