Helicobacter pylori eradication prior to initiation of long-term non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy in Chinese patients-a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized clinical trials suggested that eradication of Helicobacter pylori prior to initiation of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy would reduce the rate of peptic ulcer disease (PUD). OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of H. pylori eradication prior to initiation of long-term NSAID therapy for prevention of NSAID-induced PUD in a cohort of Chinese patients at high risk for PUD. METHODS: Clinical and economic data of 100 participants from a previously reported clinical trial conducted in Hong Kong were analyzed. Patients with a history of peptic ulcers were randomized to 1-week omeprazole 20 mg, amoxicillin 1 g and clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily (eradication group; n = 51) or 1-week omeprazole 20 mg twice daily (omeprazole group; n = 49) before initiation of diclofenac 100 mg daily for 6 months. The rates of PUD and healthcare utilization for routine follow-up as well as for management of symptomatic PUD of the 2 groups were retrieved from medical records. RESULTS: The rate of symptomatic ulcers in eradication group and omeprazole group were 3.9% and 18%, respectively. The mean direct medical cost of the eradication group was significantly lower than that of the omeprazole group by 30% (US dollar 797 (95% CI = 685 - 909) versus US dollar 1,128 (95% CI = 879 - 1,377)) (p = 0.018). The results were robust to variation of all the cost items. CONCLUSIONS: H. pylori eradication prior to initiation of NSAID therapy appeared to reduce the ulcer rate and mean direct medical cost when compared to no eradication for Chinese H. pylori-infected NSAID users at high risk for PUD.

Review article: prevention of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug gastrointestinal complications--review and recommendations based on risk assessment.

The incidence of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related ulcer complications remains high despite the availability of potent anti-ulcer drugs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related ulcer complications can be minimized by prospective assessment of patients' baseline risk, rational choice and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and selective use of co-therapy strategies with gastroprotectives. Current recommendations regarding strategies using anti-ulcer drugs and cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors for prevention of clinical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug upper gastrointestinal events are largely derived from studies using surrogates such as endoscopic ulcers, erosions, and symptoms in low- to average-risk patients. Conclusions based on surrogate and potentially manipulatable end-points are increasingly suspect with regard to applicability to clinical situations. This article reviews the risks associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs including aspirin and includes the effect of the patients' baseline risk, and the confounding effects of Helicobacter pylori infection. In addition, uncertainties regarding the clinical efficacy of anti-ulcer drugs and cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors against non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related ulcer complications are put into perspective. We propose management strategies based on the risk category: low risk (absence of risk factors) (least ulcerogenic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug at lowest effective dose), moderate risk (one to two risk factors) (as above, plus an antisecretory agent or misoprostol or a cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor), high risk (multiple risk factors or patients using concomitant low-dose aspirin, steroids, or anticoagulants) (cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor alone with steroids, plus misoprostol with warfarin, or plus a proton pump inhibitors or misoprostol with aspirin), and very high risk (history of ulcer complications) (avoid all non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, if possible or a cyclo-oxygenase-2 plus a proton pump inhibitors and/or misoprostol). The presence of H. pylori infection increases the risk of upper gastrointestinal complications in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users by two- to fourfold suggesting that all patients requiring regular non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy be tested for H. pylori.

Economic analysis of celecoxib versus diclofenac plus omeprazole for the treatment of arthritis in patients at risk of ulcer disease.

AIM: To evaluate the economic impact of celecoxib therapy vs. diclofenac plus omeprazole therapy for the treatment of arthritis in Chinese patients with a high risk of bleeding, from the perspective of a public health organization in Hong Kong. METHODS: The medical records of 287 Chinese arthritic patients with a history of bleeding ulcers who had previously participated in a randomised study of celecoxib 200 mg twice daily and extended-release diclofenac 75 mg twice daily plus 20 mg of omeprazole daily for 6 months were reviewed. RESULTS: Compared to the diclofenac plus omeprazole group, the average total direct cost per patient in the celecoxib group showed a significant reduction of 11%, from HK 10,915 (range HK dollars 10,915-57,899) to HK dollars 9714 (range HK dollars 9714-89,770) (P<0.0001) (1 US dollars=7.8 HK dollars). The median direct medical cost for routine management in the celecoxib group was significantly lower (11%) than that for the diclofenac plus omeprazole group [HK dollars 10,915 (range 10,915-28,048) vs. HK dollars 9714 (range HK dollars 6946-26,179) (P<0.0001)]. In patients who experienced recurrent bleeding, the celecoxib group showed a significantly higher median cost of management of recurrent bleeding than the diclofenac plus omeprazole group [HK dollars 8466 (range 572-29,851) vs. HK dollars 23,210 (range HK dollars 12,318-65,823)] (P=0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Celecoxib therapy appears to cost less compared with diclofenac plus omeprazole for treatment of arthritis in Chinese patients with a high risk of bleeding.

Low-dose or standard-dose proton pump inhibitors for maintenance therapy of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the use of low-dose proton pump inhibitor for the maintenance therapy of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease have shown that it might be comparable with standard-dose proton pump inhibitor treatment and superior to standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist therapy. AIM: To compare the impact of standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist, low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose proton pump inhibitor treatment for the maintenance therapy of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease on symptom control and health care resource utilization from the perspective of a public health organization in Hong Kong. METHODS: A Markov model was designed to simulate, over 12 months, the economic and clinical outcomes of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients treated with standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist, low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose proton pump inhibitor. The transition probabilities were derived from the literature. Resource utilization was retrieved from a group of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients in Hong Kong. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine the robustness of the model. RESULTS: The standard-dose proton pump inhibitor strategy was associated with the highest numbers of symptom-free patient-years (0.954 years) and quality-adjusted life-years gained (0.999 years), followed by low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist. The direct medical cost per patient in the standard-dose proton pump inhibitor group (904 US dollars) was lower than those of the low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist groups. CONCLUSIONS: The standard-dose proton pump inhibitor strategy appears to be the most effective and least costly for the maintenance management of patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in Hong Kong.

Arthritis treatment in Hong Kong--cost analysis of celecoxib versus conventional NSAIDS, with or without gastroprotective agents.

BACKGROUND: Selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors have been reported to cause fewer gastrointestinal complications when compared with conventional, non-selective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). AIM: To analyse the cost of celecoxib (selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor) and conventional NSAID regimens for the treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis from the perspective of a public health organization in Hong Kong. METHODS: A decision tree was used to analyse the cost of celecoxib, NSAID alone, NSAID plus histamine2-receptor antagonist, NSAID plus misoprostol and NSAID plus proton pump inhibitor over 6 months. Model outcomes were no gastrointestinal toxicity, gastrointestinal discomfort, symptomatic ulcer, anaemia with occult bleeding and serious gastrointestinal complications. The clinical probabilities were estimated from clinical trials. Resource utilization for gastrointestinal events was determined locally. Sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: The 6-month costs per base-case analysis were as follows: NSAID plus histamine2-receptor antagonist, 1404 HK dollars (1 US dollar = 7.8 HK dollars); celecoxib, 1545 HK dollars; NSAID alone, 1610 HK dollars; NSAID plus misoprostol, 2213 HK dollars; NSAID plus proton pump inhibitor, 2857 HK dollars. The model was sensitive to the patients' underlying gastrointestinal risk scores, daily cost of NSAID regimen, risk ratio of NSAID plus histamine2-receptor antagonist for symptomatic ulcer, daily cost of celecoxib and daily cost of histamine2-receptor antagonist. CONCLUSIONS: Celecoxib appeared to be the least costly alternative in patients with intermediate to high gastrointestinal risk for the treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis in Hong Kong.