Clarithromycin versus furazolidone for naïve Helicobacter pylori infected patients in a high clarithromycin resistance area.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The increase in antibiotic resistance makes the eradication of Helicobacter pylori more difficult. Considering the limitations of the application of susceptibility-guided therapy, it is important to find an effective empirical regimen. The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of clarithromycin-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (C-BQT) and furazolidone-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (F-BQT) in naïve H. pylori positive patients. METHODS: This was an open-label, randomized controlled, crossover trial. The trial comprised two phases. In C-F group, patients received C-BQT in the first phase; those who were still positive for H. pylori infection after the first phase entered the second phase to receive F-BQT as rescue treatment. In F-C group, patients were treated with F-BQT firstly and rescued with C-BQT. RESULTS: As first-line treatments, the eradication rates of C-BQT and F-BQT were 89.7% (157/175) and 92.0% (161/175) (P = 0.458) in intention-to-treat analysis and 93.4% (156/167) and 95.8% (161/168) (P = 0.327) in per-protocol analysis, respectively. The cumulative eradication rates of the C-F group and the F-C group were both 94.3% in intention-to-treat analysis (P = 1.000). Cost-effectiveness indexes of F-BQT and C-BQT were 0.54 and 1.24 in first-line treatments. Frequencies of adverse events in F-BQT and C-BQT had no differences (36.0% in C-BQT vs 32.6% in F-BQT, P = 0.499). CONCLUSIONS: Furazolidone-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy should be preferred for its excellent cost-effectiveness and acceptable safety.

A persuasive approach to antimicrobial stewardship in Christchurch hospitals produced a sustained decrease in intravenous clarithromycin dosing and expenditure via a switch to azithromycin orally.

AIMS: To assess a persuasive multimodel approach to decreasing unnecessary intravenous (IV) clarithromycin use for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) hospitals. METHODS: In December 2013, CDHB guidelines for empiric treatment of CAP changed to prioritise oral azithromycin over IV clarithromycin. The multimodel approach we used to implement this change included obtaining stakeholder agreement, improved guidelines access, education and pharmacist support. The impact of the intervention was evaluated by comparing macrolide usage and expenditure for the four years pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: Mean annual clarithromycin IV use decreased by 72% from 6.4 to 1.8 defined daily doses (DDDs) per 1,000 occupied bed days (OBDs) post-intervention, while oral azithromycin increased by 833% (4.2 to 39.2 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs). Concurrently, oral clarithromycin use decreased by 91% (32.9 to 2.9 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs), and roxithromycin by 71% (17.0 to 5.0 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs). Mean annual total macrolide use decreased by 21% (68.2 to 53.9 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs), while expenditure decreased by 69% mainly through avoided IV administration. CONCLUSIONS: A persuasive multimodel approach to support adoption of CAP guidelines produced a sustained decrease in IV clarithromycin use, which may have clinical benefits such as reduced occurrence of catheter-related complications.

Helicobacter pylori eradication regimens in an antibiotic high-resistance European area: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Helicobacter pylori infection (H pylori-I) affects more than half of the global population and consists an important burden to public health and healthcare expenditures, by contributing to many diseases' pathogenesis. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the current nonbismuth quadruple eradication regimens in a high antibiotic resistance area, such as Greece, concerning their cost-effectiveness, especially during financial crisis period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight hundred and nine patients who received eradication treatment against H pylori-I were included to evaluate five different regimens, using amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and metronidazole as antibiotics and one proton-pump inhibitor, based on their current eradication rates. Regimes compared 10-day concomitant use of (a) pantoprazole or (b) esomeprazole; 10-day sequential use of (c) pantoprazole or (d) esomeprazole; and 14-day hybrid using esomeprazole. Cost-effectiveness analysis ratio (CEAR) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated taking into account all direct costs and cases who needed second-line treatment. Additionally, sensitivity analysis was performed to predict all potential combinations. RESULTS: Ten-day concomitant regimen with esomeprazole was characterized by the lowest CEAR (179.17€) followed by the same regimen using pantoprazole (183.27€). Hybrid regimen, although equivalent in eradication rates, was found to have higher CEAR (187.42€), whereas sequential regimens were not cost-effective (CEAR: 204.12€ and 216.02€ respectively). DISCUSSION: This is the first study evaluating the cost-effectiveness of H pylori-I treatment regimens in a high clarithromycin-resistance (≈26.5%) European area, suggesting the 10-day concomitant regimen with generics using esomeprazole 40 mg as the most appropriate one. National and regional guidelines should include cost-effectiveness in their statements, and further studies are required to clarify the necessity of a wide "test and treat" policy for H pylori-I.

Sequential Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy in Myanmar; a randomized clinical trial of efficacy and tolerability.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is little published research to examine the best approach to the management of Helicobacter pylori in Myanmar. This study aimed to determine the relative efficacy and tolerability of sequential eradication therapy compared to Myanmar's current recommendation of a concomitant four drug regimen. METHODS: Patients were screened for H. pylori using monoclonal Stool Antigen Testing (SAT). Those testing positive were randomized 1:1 to receive receive Myanmar's first-line regimen of 14 days of concomitant rabeprazole, clarithromycin, amoxycillin and tinidazole (140 pills, cost US$23) or 10 days of sequential rabeprazole, clarithromycin, amoxycillin and tinidazole (60 pills, cost US$10). Adherence and adverse effects were recorded, and the efficacy of the regimens assessed with repeat SAT. RESULTS: Of the 1011 patients screened for H. pylori infection, 313 (31%) tested positive. There was no statistical difference in the cure rates of the two regimens in either intention-to-treat: 128/157 (82%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 75-87%) receiving sequential therapy versus 123/156 (79%; 95% CI: 72-85%) receiving concomitant therapy (P = 0.55) or per-protocol analysis: 125/131 (95%; 95% CI: 90-98) receiving sequential therapy versus 121/130 (93%; 95% CI: 87-96) receiving concomitant therapy (P = 0.42). Side effects of therapy were reported in 54/157 (47%) patients taking sequential therapy compared with 62/156 (53%) taking concomitant therapy, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: In this high-burden, resource-poor setting, less expensive sequential therapy was as effective and as well tolerated as the currently recommended concomitant four drug regimen for eradication of H. pylori.

Comparison the cost-efficacy of furazolidone-based versus clarithromycin-based quadruple therapy in initial treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in a variable clarithromycin drug-resistant region, a single-center, prospective, randomized, open-label study.

Helicobacter pylori (Hp) drug resistant rate to clarithromycin (CLA) has increased to 20% to 50%, which cause concerns regarding its effectiveness in eradicating Hp, we aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CLA-based versus furazolidone (FZD)-based quadruple therapy, and assess factors that affect anti-Hp efficacy.One hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled in this single-center, prospective, randomized, open-label study. In FZD group, 92 patients were treated with FZD plus esomeprazole, bismuth potassium citrate, and amoxicillin for 14 days. In CLA group, 93 patients were treated with the same regimen except FZD was replaced by CLA. Patients were tested 4 weeks post-treatment to confirm eradication.Of the 185 enrolled patients, 180 completed the study. On intention-to-treat analysis, Hp eradication rates in FZD and CLA groups were 90.22% and 86.02% (P = .378); in per-protocol analysis, their eradication rates were 93.26% and 87.91%, respectively (P = .220). Overall incidence of total side effects in FZD and CLA groups was 19.57% and 13.98%, and their severe side effects were 3.26% and 2.15%, respectively (P > .05). Cost-effectiveness ratios of FZD and CLA groups were 0.75 and 1.02, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of FZD group over CLA group was -3.62. Eradication failures were not associated with factors including gender, age, body mass index, smoking, alcohol consumption, educational level, and urban-rural distribution in this observation (P > .05).Despite increasing drug resistance to CLA, Hp eradication rates in FZD and CLA groups have no significant difference at present; as FZD-based quadruple therapy is more cost-effective, we recommend this regimen be a first-line choice for Hp eradication.

Cost-effectiveness of a tailored Helicobacter pylori eradication strategy based on the presence of a 23S ribosomal RNA point mutation that causes clarithromycin resistance in Korean patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The Helicobacter pylori eradication rate using conventional triple therapy has decreased due to clarithromycin (CAM) resistance in H. pylori. Recently, dual priming oligonucleotide (DPO)-based multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) can be used to detect H. pylori and point mutations in the 23S ribosomal RNA gene causing CAM resistance. This study aimed to evaluate the success rate and cost-effectiveness of tailored H. pylori eradication using DPO-PCR. METHODS: The H. pylori-positive patients diagnosed by a rapid urease test or DPO-PCR were enrolled from a single academic hospital. The patients with positive rapid urease test results received a CAM-based triple regimen. In the tailored therapy group that underwent DPO-PCR testing, patients with A2142G and/or A2143G point mutations were treated with a bismuth-containing quadruple regimen. The cost-effectiveness of H. pylori eradication success was evaluated according to the average cost per patient and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients were allocated to the triple therapy group and 124 patients to the tailored therapy group. The first-line eradication rate of H. pylori was significantly higher in the tailored therapy group than in the conventional triple therapy group (92.7% vs 76.5%, P < 0.001). The average costs per patient for tailored therapy were $307.37 and $299.59 for first-line and second-line treatments, respectively. Compared with triple therapy, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of tailored therapy were $3.96 and -$3.81 per patient for first-line and second-line treatments, respectively. CONCLUSION: In Korea, tailored H. pylori eradication using DPO-PCR may be more cost-effective than conventional triple therapy.

An Economic Modeling Study of Helicobacter pylori Eradication: Comparison of Dual Priming Oligonucleotide-Based Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction and Empirical Treatment.

Background/Aims: Dual priming oligonucleotide-based multiplex polymerase chain reaction (DPO-based PCR) can detect the presence of clarithromycin resistance without culture. The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of DPO-based PCR for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Methods: From 2015 to 2016, medical records of patients who received H. pylori eradication therapy were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: tailored group patients who were treated based on DPO-based PCR and empirical group patients. Eradication rate and medical cost, including diagnostic tests, eradication regimens, and 13C-urea breath tests, were compared between the two groups. Cost for one successful eradication was calculated in each group. The expected cost of eradication for empirical treatment was investigated by varying the treatment duration and eradication rate. Results: A total of 527 patients were analyzed (tailored group 208, empirical group 319). The eradication success rate of the first-line therapy was higher in the tailored group compared to that in the empirical group (91.8% vs 72.1%, p＜0.01). The total medical cost for each group was 114.8±14.1 U.S. dollars (USD) and 85.8±24.4 USD, respectively (p＜0.01). The total medical costs for each ultimately successful eradication in the tailored group and in the empirical group were 120.0 USD and 92.4 USD, respectively. The economic modeling expected cost of a successful eradication after a 7- or 14-day empirical treatment was 93.8 to 111.4 USD and 126.3 to 149.9 USD, respectively. Conclusions: Based on economic modeling, the cost for a successful eradication using DPO-based PCR would be similar or superior to the expected cost of a successful eradication with a 14-day empirical treatment when the first-line eradication rate is ≤80%.

Analysis of the cost-effectiveness of using vonoprazan-amoxicillin-clarithromycin triple therapy for first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication.

BACKGROUND: Vonoprazan (VPZ)-based triple therapy has been reported to have greater efficacy than a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication. However, because VPZ is more expensive than PPIs such as rabeprazole (RPZ), economic evaluation is essential. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study on 209 patients who underwent first-line eradication of H. pylori infection in Fuyoukai Murakami Hospital from 1 March 2015 to 31 March 2016. Patients who received VPZ, amoxicillin (AMPC) and clarithromycin (CAM) were assigned to the VPZ/AC group (n = 111) and patients who received RPZ, AMPC and CAM to the RPZ/AC group (n = 98). We compared the patients' backgrounds, including age, gender, use of high-dose CAM, past history of peptic ulcer, smoking and drug-related adverse events between the two groups. We defined cost as direct medical costs per patient and effectiveness as the first-line eradication rate in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis and analyzed the cost-effectiveness using the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the patients' backgrounds. The ITT analysis revealed an eradication rate of 94.6% for VPZ/AC and 86.7% for RPZ/AC. VPZ/AC cost 1155.4 Japanese yen (JPY) higher than RPZ/AC (34063.4 vs. 32908.0, JPY). CER of VPZ/AC was less than that of RPZ/AC (360.1 vs. 379.4, JPY per percent) and ICER of VPZ/AC was 147.0 JPY (1.28 Euro (EUR), 1 EUR =115 JPY) per percent. CONCLUSIONS: VPZ/AC was more cost-effective than RPZ/AC as first-line therapy for H. pylori eradication.

Clarithromycin Leads to Long-Term Survival and Cost Benefit in Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia and Sepsis.

Increasing numbers of admissions for sepsis impose a heavy burden on health care systems worldwide, while novel therapies have proven both expensive and ineffective. We explored the long-term mortality and hospitalization costs after adjunctive therapy with intravenous clarithromycin in ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Two hundred patients with sepsis and VAP were enrolled in a published randomized clinical trial; 100 were allocated to blind treatment with a placebo and another 100 to clarithromycin at 1 g daily for three consecutive days. Long-term mortality was recorded. The hospitalization cost was calculated by direct quantitation of imaging tests, medical interventions, laboratory tests, nonantibiotic drugs and antibiotics, intravenous fluids, and parenteral and enteral nutrition. Quantities were priced by the respective prices defined by the Greek government in 2002. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality; cumulative hospitalization cost was the secondary endpoint. All-cause mortality rates on day 90 were 60% in the placebo arm and 43% in the clarithromycin arm (P = 0.023); 141 patients were alive on day 28, and mortality rates between days 29 and 90 were 44.4% and 17.4%, respectively (P = 0.001). The mean cumulative costs on day 25 in the placebo group and in the clarithromycin group were €14,701.10 and €13,100.50 per patient staying alive, respectively (P = 0.048). Respective values on day 45 were €26,249.50 and €19,303.10 per patient staying alive (P = 0.011); this was associated with the savings from drugs other than antimicrobials. It is concluded that intravenous clarithromycin for three consecutive days as an adjunctive treatment in VAP and sepsis offers long-term survival benefit along with a considerable reduction in the hospitalization cost. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT00297674.).

Effect of clarithromycin in patients with suspected Gram-negative sepsis: results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A previous randomized study showed that clarithromycin decreases the risk of death due to ventilator-associated pneumonia and shortens the time until infection resolution. The efficacy of clarithromycin was tested in a larger population with sepsis. METHODS: Six hundred patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome due to acute pyelonephritis, acute intra-abdominal infections or primary Gram-negative bacteraemia were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, multicentre trial. Clarithromycin (1 g) was administered intravenously once daily for 4 days consecutively in 302 patients; another 298 patients were treated with placebo. Mortality was the primary outcome; resolution of infection and hospitalization costs were the secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The groups were well matched for demographics, disease severity, microbiology and appropriateness of the administered antimicrobials. Overall 28 day mortality was 17.1% (51 deaths) in the placebo arm and 18.5% (56 deaths) in the clarithromycin arm (P = 0.671). Nineteen out of 26 placebo-treated patients with septic shock and multiple organ dysfunctions died (73.1%) compared with 15 out of 28 clarithromycin-treated patients (53.6%, P = 0.020). The median time until resolution of infection was 5 days in both arms. In the subgroup with severe sepsis/shock, this was 10 days in the placebo arm and 6 days in the clarithromycin arm (P = 0.037). The cost of hospitalization was lower after treatment with clarithromycin (P = 0.044). Serious adverse events were observed in 1.3% and 0.7% of placebo- and clarithromycin-treated patients, respectively (P = 0.502). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous clarithromycin did not affect overall mortality; however, administration shortened the time to resolution of infection and decreased the hospitalization costs.

Sequential therapy versus standard triple-drug therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a systematic review of recent evidence.

BACKGROUND: Several alternative treatment regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication have been proposed since the efficacy of standard triple therapy has declined over time, and sequential therapy is one of them. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze and compare the efficacy, adverse effects and cost of sequential therapy with that of standard triple therapy for H. pylori infection. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases were used to retrieve all relevant articles published in the English language over the last 5 years (January 2008-October 2012). Eligibility criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing sequential and standard triple therapies in patients with documented H. pylori infection. Eligibility and quality of the trials were assessed independently by two reviewers, and the data regarding eradication rate, adverse effects and the cost of therapy were extracted. RESULTS: Of the 17 RCTs included in the analysis (Asia 13, Europe 3, Latin America, 1), 12 reported better eradication rates with the sequential therapy, four did not find a significant difference between the two treatment regimens, and one reported a better eradication rate with standard triple therapy. All except one RCT reported no significant difference in the incidence of adverse effects between standard triple therapy and sequential therapy. Sequential therapy was cheaper than standard triple therapy in all three RCTs where a cost analysis was performed. The limitations of the RCTs included in the systematic review were that the sequential therapy regimen and the duration of standard triple therapy were not uniform. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were performed in only three RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of the RCTs have shown superior eradication rates with sequential therapy, the largest RCT from Latin America did not find a significant difference between the two treatment regimens. Sequential therapy has good efficacy; however, further trials other than those from Asia and Italy are required to assess its superiority over existing regimens before recommending sequential therapy as the first line of treatment for H. pylori infection.

Preventing COPD exacerbations with macrolides: a review and budget impact analysis.

Long-term treatment with macrolides has recently been shown to reduce COPD exacerbations in doses lower than bactericidal doses. This article aims to critically review the international literature relating to the long-term effectiveness and safety of macrolides and to estimate the budget impact of preventing exacerbations with azithromycin in Belgium. Controlled clinical studies focusing on the prevention of COPD exacerbations with long-term macrolide treatment were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, Controlled Trials Registry of the Cochrane Library, and Social Science and Citation Index. The budget impact of preventing exacerbations with azithromycin in Belgium over a one-year period was calculated as the difference between the additional expenditure of annual treatment with azithromycin and the savings in hospital expenditure arising from fewer COPD exacerbations in patients with GOLD stages II-IV. Prevalence and resource use data were derived from the literature and unit cost data from Belgian sources. The literature review suggests that long-term treatment of COPD patients with azithromycin, erythromycin or clarithromycin is effective and safe, and reduces exacerbations and related hospitalizations. However, uncertainty remains about the specific patient population that is most likely to benefit from long-term macrolide treatment, the optimal dose and duration of macrolide treatment, and the potential impact of long-term macrolide treatment on resistance. The budget impact analysis demonstrated that annual hospital savings of €950 million resulting from fewer exacerbations outweighed additional expenditure on azithromycin of €595 million, implying that the prevention of COPD exacerbations with azithromycin is a cost saving strategy in Belgium.

Sequential therapy versus standard triple drug therapy for eradication of Helicobacter pylori in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer following simple closure.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to clarithromycin, a component of standard triple therapy, leads to inconsistent eradication rates of Helicobacter pylori infection. Some studies have shown higher eradication rates for H. pylori using sequential regimen. This study was done to compare the eradication rates for H. pylori infection between the standard triple drug therapy and the sequential therapy. METHODS: Seventy-three patients with perforated duodenal ulcer following simple closure with H. pylori infection were randomized to receive either standard triple drug therapy or the sequential therapy. Standard triple drug therapy comprised of omeprazole, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin for 10 days. Sequential therapy comprised of omeprazole and amoxicillin or the first 5 days followed by omeprazole, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin for the next 5 days. Follow-up endoscopy was done at 2 months to assess the eradication rates, compliance, and side effects with each regimen. RESULTS: Eradication rates for standard triple therapy and sequential regimen were 81.25% and 87.09%, respectively (p = 0.732). The cost of sequential therapy was cheaper and incidence of side effects and compliance were similar in each group. CONCLUSION: Standard triple therapy and sequential therapy have similar efficacy for eradication of H. pylori and sequential therapy is an economical alternative to standard triple therapy.

Empirical levofloxacin-containing versus clarithromycin-containing sequential therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Antimicrobial drug resistance is a major cause of the failure of Helicobacter pylori eradication and is largely responsible for the decline in eradication rate. Quadruple therapy has been suggested as a first-line regimen in areas with clarithromycin resistance rate >15%. This randomised trial aimed at evaluating the efficacy of a levofloxacin-containing sequential regimen in the eradication of H pylori-infected patients in a geographical area with >15% prevalence of clarithromycin resistance versus a clarithromycin containing sequential therapy. METHODS: 375 patients who were infected with H pylori and naïve to treatment were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments: (1) 5 days omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1 g twice daily followed by 5 days omeprazole 20 mg twice daily +clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily + tinidazole 500 mg twice daily; or (2) omeprazole 20 mg twice daily +amoxicillin 1 g twice daily followed by omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + levofloxacin 250 mg twice daily +tinidazole 500 mg twice daily; or (3) omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1 g twice daily followed by omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + levofloxacin 500 mg twice daily + tinidazole 500 mg twice daily. Antimicrobial resistance was assessed by the E-test. Efficacy, adverse events and costs were determined for each group. RESULTS: Eradication rates in the intention-to-treat analyses were 80.8% (95% CI, 72.8% to 87.3%) with clarithromycin sequential therapy, 96.0% (95% CI, 90.9%to 98.7%) with levofloxacin-250 sequential therapy, and 96.8% (95% CI, 92.0% to 99.1%) with levofloxacin-500 sequential therapy. No differences in prevalence of antimicrobial resistance or incidence of adverse events were observed between groups. Levofloxacin-250 therapy was cost-saving compared with clarithromycin sequential therapy. CONCLUSION: In an area with >15% prevalence of clarithromycin resistant H pylori strains, a levofloxacin containing sequential therapy is more effective, equally safe and cost-saving compared to a clarithromycin containing sequential therapy.

Helicobacter pylori eradication in long-term proton pump inhibitor users is highly cost-effective: economic analysis of the HELPUP trial.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use is costly and about two-thirds of prescribing is long-term. Although 20-50% of patients may be infected with Helicobacter pylori, eradication is not normal clinical practice. AIM: To establish if H. pylori eradication in long-term PPI users is cost-effective. METHODS: Long-term PPI-using patients (n = 183) testing positive for H. pylori were randomly assigned to true or placebo eradication therapy. Patients provided 2-year resource data, and 1-year symptom severity scores. A within-trial cost effectiveness analysis was conducted from a British health service perspective. RESULTS: Significant reductions in resource use occurred comparing eradication with placebo. After 2 years, PPI prescriptions (full-dose equivalents) fell by 3.9 (P < 0.0001); clinician (GP) consultations by 2.4 (P = 0.0001); upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopies by 14.8% (P = 0.008); clinician GI-related home visits by 19.9% (P = 0.005) and abdominal ultrasound scans fell by 20.3% (P = 0.005). Average net savings/patient were pound93 (95% CI: 33-153) after costs of detection and eradication had been deducted. At 1 year, Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire symptoms fell by 3.1 (P = 0.005) and quality-of-life measures improved (EuroQol-5D: 0.089, P = 0.08; visual analogue scale: 5.6, P = 0.002) favouring eradication. CONCLUSION: Helicobacter pylori eradication in infected, long-term PPI users is an economically dominant strategy, significantly reducing overall healthcare costs and symptom severity.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of antimicrobial treatment of community-acquired pneumonia taking into account resistance in Belgium.

OBJECTIVE: This article assesses the cost-effectiveness of outpatient antimicrobial treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) taking into account resistance in Belgium. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Our decision analytic model focused on mild to moderate CAP, but did not consider severe CAP. Treatment pathways reflected empirical treatment initiated in the absence of data on CAP aetiology. First-line treatment consisted of moxifloxacin, co-amoxiclav, cefuroxime or clarithromycin. If first-line treatment was unsuccessful, patients were either hospitalised or second-line treatment with a different antimicrobial was initiated. Clinical failure rates were obtained from the published literature or expert opinion. Costs were calculated using published sources from the third-party payer perspective. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Effectiveness measures included first-line clinical failure avoided, second-line treatment avoided, hospitalisation avoided and death avoided. Healthcare costs were included, but costs of productivity loss were not considered. RESULTS: Costs of treating a CAP episode amounted to 144E with moxifloxacin/co-amoxiclav; 222E with co-amoxiclav/clarithromycin; 211E with cefuroxime/moxifloxacin; and 193E with clarithromycin/moxifloxacin. The rate of first-line failure was 5%, 16%, 19% and 18% for these four treatment strategies, respectively. The rate of second-line treatment amounted to 4%, 13%, 16% and 15%, respectively. The hospitalisation rate was 1%, 4%, 4% and 4%, respectively. The death rate was 0.01%, 0.04%, 0.03% and 0.03%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses supported the dominance of moxifloxacin/co-amoxiclav in nearly all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment of CAP patients with moxifloxacin followed by co-amoxiclav or hospitalisation if required was more effective and less costly as compared with first-line treatment with co-amoxiclav, cefuroxime or clarithromycin.

Clinical trial: knowledge of negative Helicobacter pylori status reduces subsequent dyspepsia-related resource use.

BACKGROUND: Screening for Helicobacter pylori reduces dyspepsia and dyspepsia-related costs in positive individuals. AIMS: To assess effect of knowledge of H. pylori status on healthcare-seeking in negative individuals. METHODS: H. pylori-negative subjects in a community screening programme were randomized to placebo triple therapy or informed of their negative H. pylori status. Dyspepsia-related resource data were extracted from primary care records at 2 years, and National Health Service reference costs were applied to calculate the total cost per subject. Proportions of individuals incurring any cost were compared using a relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Differences in costs were compared using an independent sample t-test. RESULTS: A total of 1353 H. pylori-negative individuals were randomized to placebo whilst 1355 were informed of their infection status. In the placebo arm, 212 (16%) subsequently incurred any dyspepsia-related cost compared to 172 (13%) informed of their infection status (RR of incurring cost = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67-0.97). Those informed of their infection status incurred lower costs (mean saving per individual = pound 11.02; 95% CI: - pound 3.52 to 25.56). CONCLUSIONS: H. pylori-negative individuals informed of infection status sought health care for dyspepsia less often than those who were unaware. Population screening may reduce dyspepsia-related costs in uninfected, as well as infected individuals.

Pharmacoeconomic comparison of Helicobacter pylori eradication regimens.

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori is the most important etiologic agent for development of peptic ulcer, chronic gastritis and gastric carcinomas. It is now well established that H. pylori eradication treatment is more cost-effective than acid suppressing therapies alone for the treatment of peptic ulcer disease. However, the comparative cost-effectiveness of various H. pylori eradication regimens is still not clear. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to make a pharmacoeconomic comparison of different H. pylori eradication regimens in patients with peptic ulcer disease or chronic gastritis, using real-world cost and effectiveness data. SETTING: Istanbul University Hospital and Marmara University Hospital. METHOD: A total of 75 patients diagnosed as H. pylori (+) by endoscopy were randomized to receive one of the seven H. pylori treatment protocols. These protocols were as follows: (LAC) = 'lansoprazole 30 mg bid + amoxicillin 1 g bid + clarithromycin 500 mg bid' for 7 days and (OCM) = 'omeprazole 20 mg bid + clarithromycin 250 mg bid + metronidazole 500 mg bid'; (OAM) = 'omeprazole 40 mg qd + amoxicillin 500 mg tid + metronidazole 500 mg tid'; (MARB) = 'metronidazole 250 mg tid + amoxicillin 500 mg qid + ranitidine 300 mg hs + bismuth 300 mg qid'; (OAC) = omeprazole 20 mg bid + amoxicillin 1 g bid + clarithromycin 500 mg bid'; (OCA) = omeprazole 40 mg bid + clarithromycin 500 mg bid + amoxicillin 1 g bid'; (OAB) = 'omeprazole 20 mg bid + amoxicillin 500 mg tid + bismuth 300 mg qid' each for 14 days. Only direct costs were included in the analysis. Effectiveness was measured in terms of "successful eradication". The cost-effectiveness ratios of the regimens were calculated using these effectiveness and cost data. The perspective of the study was assumed as the Government's perspective. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost-effectiveness ratios of eradication regimens. RESULTS: MARB and OCA regimens were found to be more cost-effective than the other treatment regimens. The eradication rates and cost-effectiveness ratios calculated for these protocols were 90% (158.7 euros) for MARB and 90% (195.8 euros) for OCA regimen. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the importance of using local pharmacoeconomic data. Analyses such as this give decision-makers the tools to choose a better treatment option which is both highly effective yet and has a low cost.

[Diagnosis and therapy of Rhodococcus equi infection in the horse]. / De diagnostiek en therapeutische mogelijkheden van een Rhodococcus equi infectie bij het paard.

Infection with Rhodococcus equi is an important cause of pneumonia in foals, but other organ systems may also be affected. The intracellular presence of R. equi and the formation of granulomatous and suppurative inflammatory tissue mean that prolonged treatment is needed. The pharmacological properties of the combination of erythromycin and rifampicin have improved the survival of foals infected with R. equi; however, erythromycin can cause adverse reactions in foals and mares, which has prompted the search for alternative therapies. The combination of azithromycin or clarithromycin with rifampicin seems to be a promising alternative. However these combinations are expensive and adverse effects remain to be determined, especially in the dams of treated foals. Thus correct diagnosis and appropriate use of drugs are essential for the treatment of R. equi infection in foals.