Cost Analysis of Liver Acquisition Fees Before and After Acuity Circle Policy Implementation.

Importance: Acuity circles (AC) liver allocation policy was implemented to eliminate donor service area geographic boundaries from liver allocation and to decrease variability in median Model of End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score at transplant and wait list mortality. However, the broader sharing of organs was also associated with more flights for organ procurements and higher costs associated with the increase in flights. Objective: To determine whether the costs associated with liver acquisition changed after the implementation of AC allocation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center cost comparison study analyzed fees associated with organ acquisition before and after AC allocation implementation. The cost data were collected from a single transplant institute with 2 liver transplant centers, located 30 miles apart, in different donation service areas. Cost, recipient, and transportation data for all cases that included fees associated with liver acquisition from July 1, 2019, to October 31, 2020, were collected. Exposures: Primary liver offer acceptance with associated organ procurement organization or charter flight fees. Main Outcomes and Measures: Specific fees (organ acquisition, surgeon, import, and charter flight fees) and total fees per donor were collected for all accepted liver donors with at least 1 associated fee during the study period. Results: Of 213 included donors, 171 were used for transplant; 90 of 171 (52.6%) were male, and the median (interquartile range) age of donors was 41.0 (30.0-52.8) years in the pre-AC period and 36.9 (24.0-48.8) years in the post-AC period. There was no significant difference in the post-AC compared with pre-AC period in median (range) MELD score (24 [8-40] vs 25 [6-40]; P = .27) or median (range) match run sequence (15 [1-3951] vs 10 [1-1138]; P = .31), nor in mean (SD) distance traveled (155.83 [157.00] vs 140.54 [144.33] nautical miles; P = .32) or percentage of donors requiring flights (58.5% [69 of 118] vs 56.8% [54 of 95]; P = .82). However, costs increased significantly in the post-AC period: total cost increased 16% per accepted donor (mean [SD] of $52 966 [13 278] vs $45 725 [9300]; P < .001) and 55% per declined donor (mean [SD] of $15 865 [3942] vs $10 217 [4853]; P < .001). Contributing factors included more than 2-fold increases in the proportions of donors incurring import fees (31.4% [37 of 118] vs 12.6% [12 of 95]; P = .002) and surgeon fees (19.5% [23 of 118] vs 9.5% [9 of 95]; P = .05), increased acquisition fees (10% increase; mean [SD] of $43 860 [3266] vs $39 980 [2236]; P < .001), and increased flight expenses (43% increase; mean [SD] of $12 904 [6066] vs $9049 [5140]; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: The unintended consequences of implementing broader sharing without addressing organ acquisition fees to account for increased importation between organ procurement organizations must be remedied to contain costs and ensure viability of transplant programs.

Enhanced recovery in liver transplantation: A value-based approach to complex surgical care.

BACKGROUND: Value-based healthcare focuses on improving outcomes relative to cost. We aimed to study the impact of an enhanced recovery pathway for liver transplant recipients on providing value. METHODS: In total, 379 liver recipients were identified: pre-enhanced recovery pathway (2017, n = 57) and post-enhanced recovery pathway (2018-2020, n = 322). The enhanced recovery pathway bundle was defined through multidisciplinary efforts and included optimal fluid management, end-of-case extubation, multimodal analgesia, and a standardized care pathway. Pre- and post-enhanced recovery pathway patients were compared with regard to extubation rates, lengths of stay, complications, readmissions, survival, and costs. RESULTS: Pre- and post-enhanced recovery pathway recipient model for end-stage liver disease score and balance of risk scores were similar, although post-enhanced recovery pathway recipients had a higher median donor risk index (1.55 vs 1.39, P = .003). End-of-case extubation rates were 78% post-enhanced recovery pathway (including 91% in 2020) versus 5% pre-enhanced recovery pathway, with post-enhanced recovery pathway patients having decreased median intraoperative transfusion requirements (1,500 vs 3,000 mL, P < .001). Post-enhanced recovery pathway recipients had shorter median intensive care unit (1.6 vs 2.3 days, P = .01) and hospital stays (5.4 vs 8.0 days, P < .001). Incidence of severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) complications during the index hospitalization were similar between pre-enhanced recovery pathway versus post-enhanced recovery pathway groups (33% vs 23%, P = .13), as were 30-day readmissions (26% vs 33%, P = .44) and 1-year survival (93.0% vs 94.5%, P = .58). The post-enhanced recovery pathway cohort demonstrated a significant reduction in median direct cost per case ($11,406; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Implementation of an enhanced recovery pathway in liver transplantation is feasible, safe, and effective in delivering value, even in the setting of complex surgical care.

The burden associated with thrombocytopenia and platelet transfusions among patients with chronic liver disease.

Background: Thrombocytopenia (TCP), a common complication of chronic liver disease (CLD), can cause uncontrolled bleeding during procedures. As such, CLD patients with TCP and platelet counts <50,000/µL often receive prophylactic platelet transfusions before invasive procedures. However, platelet transfusions are associated with clinical complications, which may result in increased healthcare utilization and costs.Objective: This retrospective database analysis describes the clinical and economic burden in CLD patients with TCP, CLD patients without TCP, and CLD patients with TCP who receive platelet transfusions.Methods: Adult CLD patients with or without TCP were identified in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Medicare Supplemental data from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2015. CLD patients with or without TCP were propensity-score matched (1:1) for the analysis of annual healthcare utilization and costs. Platelet transfusions among CLD patients with TCP were identified using procedure codes.Results: Of the 601,626 patients with CLD, 8,292 (1.4%) patients with TCP were matched to patients without TCP. Among CLD patients with TCP, 981 (11.8%) patients received ≥1 platelet transfusions and met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Compared to patients without TCP, CLD patients with TCP had more complications, including higher prevalence of neutropenia (11.4% vs 2.9%) and bleeding events (21.4% vs 10.9%), greater resource utilization including greater average hospital admissions (1.2 vs 0.7, p < .01), greater average ER visits (2.1 vs 1.3, p < .01), higher average outpatient office visits (20.1 vs 18.4, p < .01), and higher average healthcare costs including total costs (p < .01), inpatient costs (p < .01), ER visit costs (p < .01), and outpatient office visit costs (p < .01). The mean annual total costs in CLD and TCP patients with platelet transfusions were $206,396.Conclusions: CLD patients with TCP, and particularly those who received platelet transfusions, experienced significantly greater clinical and economic burden compared to CLD patients without TCP. Safer and more cost-effective treatments to increase platelets are necessary.

Health Care Utilization and Costs for Patients With End-Stage Liver Disease Are Significantly Higher at the End of Life Compared to Those of Other Decedents.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) have progressively complex medical needs. However, little is known about their end-of-life health care utilization or associated costs. We performed a population-based study to evaluate the end-of-life direct utilization and costs for patients with ESLD among health care sectors in the province of Ontario. METHODS: We used linked Ontario health administrative databases to conduct a population-based retrospective cohort study of all decedents from April 1, 2010, through March 31, 2013. Patients with ESLD were compared with patients without ESLD with regard to total health care utilization and costs in the last year and last 90 days of life. RESULTS: The median age at death was significantly lower for ESLD decedents (65 y; interquartile range, 56-75 y) than for individuals without ESLD (80 y; interquartile range, 68-88 y). The median cost in the last year of life was significantly greater for patients with ESLD ($51,235 vs $44,456 without ESLD) (P < .001). Median ESLD end-of-life care costs also significantly exceeded those associated with 4 of the 5 most resource-intensive chronic conditions ($69,040 for ESLD vs $59,088 for non-ESLD) (P < .001). Cost differences were most pronounced in the final 90 days of life. During this period, patients with ESLD spent 4.7 more days in the hospital (95% CI, 4.3-5.1 d) than patients without ESLD (P < .0001), had significantly higher odds of dying in an institutional setting (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.7-1.9) (P < .0001), and incurred an additional $4201 in costs (95% CI, $3384-$5019; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based study in Canada, we found that patients with ESLD incur significantly higher end-of-life care costs than decedents without ESLD, predominantly owing to increased time in the hospital during the final 90 days of life.

Current Knowledge, Barriers to Implementation, and Future Directions in Palliative Care for End-Stage Liver Disease.

End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is associated with a high degree of morbidity and mortality as well as symptom burden. Despite this, the rate of consultation with palliative care (PC) providers remains low, and invasive procedures near the end of life are commonplace. Studies show that involvement of PC providers improves patient satisfaction, and evidence from other chronic diseases demonstrates reduced costs of care and potentially increased survival. Better integration of PC is imperative but hindered by patient and provider misconceptions about its role in the care of patients with ESLD, specifically among candidates for liver transplantation. Additionally, reimbursement barriers and lack of provider knowledge may contribute to PC underutilization. In this review, we discuss the benefits of PC in ESLD, the variability of its delivery, and key stakeholders' perceptions about its use. Additionally, we identify barriers to more widespread PC adoption and highlight areas for future research.

Strategies That Reduce 90-Day Readmissions and Inpatient Costs After Liver Transplantation.

Liver transplantation (LT) is hospital-resource intensive and associated with high rates of readmission. We have previously shown a reduction in 30-day readmission rates by implementing a specifically designed protocol to increase access to outpatient care. The aim of this work is to determine if the strategies that reduce 30-day readmission after LT were effective in also reducing 90-day readmission rates and costs. A protocol was developed to reduce inpatient readmissions after LT that expanded outpatient services and provided alternatives to readmission. The 90-day readmission rates and costs were compared before and after implementing strategies outlined in the protocol. Multivariable analysis was used to control for potential confounding factors. Over the study period, 304 adult primary LTs were performed on patients with a median biological Model for End-Stage Liver Disease of 22. There were 112 (37%) patients who were readmitted within 90 days of transplant. The readmission rates before and after implementation of the protocol were 53% and 26%, respectively (P < 0.001). The most common reason for readmission was elevated liver tests/rejection (24%). In multivariable analysis, the protocol remained associated with avoiding readmission (odds ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.55; P < 0.001). The median length of stay after transplant before and after protocol implementation was 8 days and 7 days, respectively. A greater proportion of patients were discharged to hospital lodging after protocol implementation (10% versus 19%; P = 0.03). The 90-day readmission costs were reduced by 55%, but the total 90-day costs were reduced by only 2.7% because of higher outpatient costs and index admission costs. In conclusion, 90-day readmission rates and readmission costs can be reduced by improving access to outpatient services and hospital-local lodging. Total 90-day costs were similar between the 2 groups because of higher outpatient costs after the protocol was introduced.

The Economics of Organ Transplantation.

To determine the cost effectiveness of transplantation, we analyzed the financial economics of the organ and tissue transplant process. We compared the cost of this process with traditional modalities for treating endstage liver and kidney disease. Medical, surgical, legal, social, ethical, and religious issues are important in organ transplant procedures. Government, health insurance companies, and uninsured individuals are affected by the financial economics of organ transplantation. The distribution of financial burden differs among countries and is dependent on the unique circumstances of each country.

Use of direct-acting antiviral agents in hepatitis C virus-infected liver transplant candidates.

Since the advent of direct acting antiviral (DAA) agents, chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment has evolved at a rapid pace. In contrast to prior regimen involving ribavirin and pegylated interferon, these newer agents are highly effective, well-tolerated, have shorter course of therapy and safer essentially in all HCV patients including those with advanced liver disease and following liver transplantation. Clinicians caring for HCV-infected patients on the liver transplant (LT) waitlist are often faced with a dilemma whether to treat HCV infection before or after liver transplantation. Sustained virological response (SVR) rates following HCV treatment may improve hepatic function sufficiently enough to negate the need for LT in certain patients. On the other hand, the decrease in MELD without improvement in quality of life in certain patients may lead to delay or dropout from potentially curative LT surgery list. In this context, our review focuses on the approach to and optimal timing of DAA-based treatment of HCV infection in LT candidates in the peri-transplant period.

Cold ischemia time is an important risk factor for post-liver transplant prolonged length of stay.

Risk analysis of cold ischemia time (CIT) in liver transplantation has largely focused on patient and graft survival. Posttransplant length of stay is a sensitive marker of morbidity and cost. We hypothesize that CIT is a risk factor for posttransplant prolonged length of stay (PLOS) and aim to conduct an hour-by-hour analysis of CIT and PLOS. We retrospectively reviewed all adult, first-time liver transplants between March 2002 and September 2016 in the United Network for Organ Sharing database. The 67,426 recipients were categorized by hourly CIT increments. Multivariate logistic regression of PLOS (defined as >30 days), CIT groups, and an extensive list of confounding variables was performed. Linear regression between length of stay and CIT as continuous variables was also performed. CIT 1-6 hours was protective against PLOS, whereas CIT >7 hours was associated with increased odds for PLOS. The lowest odds for PLOS were observed with 1-2 hours (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.92) and 2-3 hours (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.55-0.78) of CIT. OR for PLOS steadily increased with increasing CIT, reaching the greatest odds for PLOS with 13-14 hours (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.57-2.67) and 15-16 hours (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.27-3.33) of CIT. Linear regression revealed a positive correlation between length of stay and CIT with a correlation coefficient of +0.35 (P < 0.001). In conclusion, post-liver transplant length of stay is sensitive to CIT, with a substantial increase in the odds of PLOS observed with nearly every additional hour of cold ischemia. We conclude that CIT should be minimized to protect against the morbidity and cost associated with posttransplant PLOS. Liver Transplantation 24 762-768 2018 AASLD.

Cost of achieving equivalent outcomes in sicker patients after liver transplant.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to characterize variability in cost after straightforward orthotopic liver transplant (OLT). METHODS: Using the University HealthSystem Consortium and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients databases, we identified patients who underwent OLT between 2011 and 2014. Patients meeting criteria for straightforward OLT, defined as length of stay < 14 days with discharge to home, were selected (n = 5763) and grouped into tertiles (low, medium, high) according to cost of perioperative stay. RESULTS: Patients undergoing straightforward OLT were of similar demographics regardless of cost. High cost patients were more likely to require preoperative hemodialysis, had higher severity of illness, and higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) (p < 0.01). High cost patients required greater utilization of resources including lab tests, blood transfusions, and opioids (p < 0.01). Despite having higher burden of disease and requiring increased resource utilization, high cost OLT patients with a straightforward perioperative course were shown to have identical 2-year graft and overall survival compared to lower cost patients (p = 0.82 and p = 0.63), respectively. CONCLUSION: Providing adequate perioperative care for OLT patients with higher severity of illness and disease burden requires increased cost and resource utilization; however, doing so provides these patients with long term survival equivalent to more routine patients.

Functional status, healthcare utilization, and the costs of liver transplantation.

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score predicts higher transplant healthcare utilization and costs; however, the independent contribution of functional status towards costs is understudied. The study objective was to evaluate the association between functional status, as measured by Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), and liver transplant (LT) costs in the first posttransplant year. In a cohort of 598 LT recipients from July 1, 2009 to November 30, 2014, multivariable models assessed associations between KPS and outcomes. LT recipients needing full assistance (KPS 10%-40%) vs being independent (KPS 80%-100%) were more likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility after LT (22% vs 3%) and be rehospitalized within the first posttransplant year (78% vs 57%), all P < .001. In adjusted generalized linear models, in addition to MELD (P < .001), factors independently associated with higher 1-year post-LT transplant costs were older age, poor functional status (KPS 10%-40%), living donor LT, pre-LT hemodialysis, and the donor risk index (all P < .001). One-year survival for patients in the top cost decile was 83% vs 93% for the rest of the cohort (log rank P < .001). Functional status is an important determinant of posttransplant resource utilization; therefore, standardized measurements of functional status should be considered to optimize candidate selection and outcomes.

Higher MELD score increases the overall cost on the waiting list for liver transplantation: a micro-costing analysis based study.

BACKGROUND:: The pre-transplant period is complex and includes lots of procedures. The severity of liver disease predisposes to a high number of hospitalizations and high costs procedures. Economic evaluation studies are important tools to handle costs on the waiting list for liver transplantation. OBJECTIVE:: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the total cost of the patient on the waiting list for liver transplantation and the main resources related to higher costs. METHODS:: A cost study in a cohort of 482 patients registered on waiting list for liver transplantation was carried out. In 24 months follow-up, we evaluated all costs of materials, medicines, consultations, procedures, hospital admissions, laboratorial tests and image exams, hemocomponents replacements, and nutrition. The total amount of each resource or component used was aggregated and multiplied by the unitary cost, and thus individual cost for each patient was obtained. RESULTS:: The total expenditure of the 482 patients was US$ 6,064,986.51. Outpatient and impatient costs correspond to 32.4% of total cost (US$ 1,965,045.52) and 67.6% (US$ 4,099,940.99) respectively. Main cost drivers in outpatient were: medicines (44.31%), laboratorial tests and image exams (31.68%). Main cost drivers regarding hospitalizations were: medicines (35.20%), bed use in ward and ICU (26.38%) and laboratorial tests (13.72%). Patients with MELD score between 25-30 were the most expensive on the waiting list (US$ 16,686.74 ± 16,105.02) and the less expensive were those with MELD below 17 (US$ 5,703.22 ± 9,318.68). CONCLUSION:: Total costs on the waiting list for liver transplantation increased according to the patient's severity. Individually, hospitalizations, hemocomponents reposition and hepatocellular carcinoma treatment were the main cost drivers to the patient on the waiting list. The longer the waiting time, the higher the total cost on list, causing greater impact on health systems.

Higher MELD score increases the overall cost on the waiting list for liver transplantation: a micro-costing analysis based study / Altos valores de MELD aumentam o custo total em lista de espera para o transplante hepático. Um estudo de microcusteio

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The pre-transplant period is complex and includes lots of procedures. The severity of liver disease predisposes to a high number of hospitalizations and high costs procedures. Economic evaluation studies are important tools to handle costs on the waiting list for liver transplantation. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the total cost of the patient on the waiting list for liver transplantation and the main resources related to higher costs. METHODS: A cost study in a cohort of 482 patients registered on waiting list for liver transplantation was carried out. In 24 months follow-up, we evaluated all costs of materials, medicines, consultations, procedures, hospital admissions, laboratorial tests and image exams, hemocomponents replacements, and nutrition. The total amount of each resource or component used was aggregated and multiplied by the unitary cost, and thus individual cost for each patient was obtained. RESULTS: The total expenditure of the 482 patients was US$ 6,064,986.51. Outpatient and impatient costs correspond to 32.4% of total cost (US$ 1,965,045.52) and 67.6% (US$ 4,099,940.99) respectively. Main cost drivers in outpatient were: medicines (44.31%), laboratorial tests and image exams (31.68%). Main cost drivers regarding hospitalizations were: medicines (35.20%), bed use in ward and ICU (26.38%) and laboratorial tests (13.72%). Patients with MELD score between 25-30 were the most expensive on the waiting list (US$ 16,686.74 ± 16,105.02) and the less expensive were those with MELD below 17 (US$ 5,703.22 ± 9,318.68). CONCLUSION: Total costs on the waiting list for liver transplantation increased according to the patient's severity. Individually, hospitalizations, hemocomponents reposition and hepatocellular carcinoma treatment were the main cost drivers to the patient on the waiting list. The longer the waiting time, the higher the total cost on list, causing greater impact on health systems.

RESUMO CONTEXTO: O período pré-transplante é complexo e inclui grande quantidade de procedimentos. A gravidade da doença hepática predispõe a um alto número de internações e procedimentos de alto custo. Estudos em avaliação econômica são uma importante ferramenta para o manejo dos custos em lista de espera para o transplante hepático. OBJETIVO: O objetivo do presente estudo foi avaliar o custo total do paciente em lista de espera para o transplante hepático e os principais recursos relacionados ao alto custo. MÉTODOS: Foi realizado um estudo de coorte em 482 pacientes registrados em lista de espera para o transplante hepático. Os pacientes foram acompanhados por um período de 24 meses, no qual foram avaliados todos os custos de materiais, medicamentos, consultas, procedimentos internações, exames laboratoriais e de imagem, reposição de hemocomponentes e nutrição recebida. A quantidade total de cada recurso e componente utilizado foi obtida e multiplicada pelo seu valor unitário e, desta maneira, o custo individual de cada paciente foi obtido. RESULTADOS: O total gasto pelos 482 pacientes foi de US$ 6.064.986,51. Os custos ambulatoriais corresponderam a 32,4% do total (US$ 1.965.045,52) e os custos em internação corresponderam a 67,6% do total (US$ 4.099.940,99). Os principais determinantes do custo em ambulatório foram: medicamentos (44,31%) e exames laboratoriais e de imagem (31,68%). Os principais determinantes de custo em internações foram: medicamentos (35,20%), utilização do leito em enfermaria e em UTI (26,38%) e exames laboratoriais (13,72%) Pacientes com valores de MELD entre 25-30 foram os de maiores custos em lista de espera (US$ 16.686,74 ± 16,105.02) e os de menor custo foram os pacientes com MELD abaixo de 17 (US$ 5.703,22 ± 9.318,68). CONCLUSÃO: O custo total em lista de espera para o transplante hepático aumenta de acordo com a gravidade do paciente. Individualmente, internações, reposição de hemocomponentes e o tratamento do paciente com carcinoma hepatocelular são os principais determinantes de custo para os pacientes em lista de espera para o transplante hepático. Quanto maior o tempo de espera, maiores serão os custos em lista, causando maior impacto nos sistemas de saúde.

Before or After Transplantation? A Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Treating Waitlisted Patients With Hepatitis C.

All patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections can and should be treated. Though highly effective direct-acting antiviral therapies are costly, the price of a cure is a 1-time investment that is outweighed by future benefits. For clinicians caring for patients requiring liver transplant, the key question relates to the timing of treatment: before or after liver transplantation? On 1 hand, treating HCV often improves our patients' model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, decreasing costs, and potentially improving longevity by reducing our patients' risk of death and transplantation. On the other hand, there is a concern that the cured patient with decompensated cirrhosis will find themselves in "MELD purgatory" with nonprogressive liver disease but a poor quality of life. At the same time, some patients, such as those with hepatocellular carcinoma, will require liver transplant irrespective of their MELD meaning that pretransplant therapy cannot reduce costs in such settings. These important tradeoffs are often difficult reconcile for clinicians who care for patients awaiting liver transplant. Fortunately, guidance for navigating these competing concerns can be obtained from cost-effectiveness analyses. Herein, we review the available data on this approach to HCV therapy before or after liver transplant.

Clinical epidemiology and disease burden of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is defined as the presence of hepatic fat accumulation after the exclusion of other causes of hepatic steatosis, including other causes of liver disease, excessive alcohol consumption, and other conditions that may lead to hepatic steatosis. NAFLD encompasses a broad clinical spectrum ranging from nonalcoholic fatty liver to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), advanced fibrosis, cirrhosis, and finally hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). NAFLD is the most common liver disease in the world and NASH may soon become the most common indication for liver transplantation. Ongoing persistence of obesity with increasing rate of diabetes will increase the prevalence of NAFLD, and as this population ages, many will develop cirrhosis and end-stage liver disease. There has been a general increase in the prevalence of NAFLD, with Asia leading the rise, yet the United States is following closely behind with a rising prevalence from 15% in 2005 to 25% within 5 years. NAFLD is commonly associated with metabolic comorbidities, including obesity, type II diabetes, dyslipidemia, and metabolic syndrome. Our understanding of the pathophysiology of NAFLD is constantly evolving. Based on NAFLD subtypes, it has the potential to progress into advanced fibrosis, end-stage liver disease and HCC. The increasing prevalence of NAFLD with advanced fibrosis, is concerning because patients appear to experience higher liver-related and non-liver-related mortality than the general population. The increased morbidity and mortality, healthcare costs and declining health related quality of life associated with NAFLD makes it a formidable disease, and one that requires more in-depth analysis.

Obese children with fatty liver: Between reality and disease mongering.

Following the current epidemic of obesity, the worldwide prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has increased with potential serious health implications. While it is established that in adults NAFLD can progress to end-stage liver disease in many cases, the risk of progression during childhood is less well defined. Since most obese children are not adherent to lifestyle modifications and hypocaloric diets, there is a growing number of studies on pharmacological interventions with the risk of disease mongering, the practice of widening the boundaries of illness in order to expand the markets for treatment. Here, we propose a critical appraisal of the best available evidence about long-term course of pediatric NAFLD and efficacy of treatments other than hypocaloric diet and physical exercise. As a result, the number of NAFLD children with a poor outcome is small in spite of the alarming tones used in some papers; large-scale longitudinal studies with long-term follow-up of pediatric NAFLD patients are lacking; the studies on ancillary pharmacological interventions have been performed in few patients with inconclusive and conflicting results.

Liver transplantation after share 35: Impact on pretransplant and posttransplant costs and mortality.

Share 35 was implemented in 2013 to direct livers to the most urgent candidates by prioritizing Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) ≥ 35 patients. We aim to evaluate this policy's impact on costs and mortality. Our study includes 834 wait-listed patients and 338 patients who received deceased donor, solitary liver transplants at Mayo Clinic between January 2010 and December 2014. Of these patients, 101 (30%) underwent transplantation after Share 35. After Share 35, 29 (28.7%) MELD ≥ 35 patients received transplants, as opposed to 46 (19.4%) in the pre-Share 35 era (P = 0.06). No significant difference in 90-day wait-list mortality (P = 0.29) nor 365-day posttransplant mortality (P = 0.68) was found between patients transplanted before or after Share 35. Mean costs were $3,049 (P = 0.30), $5226 (P = 0.18), and $10,826 (P = 0.03) lower post-Share 35 for the 30-, 90-, and 365-day pretransplant periods, and mean costs were $5010 (P = 0.41) and $5859 (P = 0.57) higher, and $9145 (P = 0.54) lower post-Share 35 for the 30-, 90-, and 365-day posttransplant periods. In conclusion, the added cost of transplanting more MELD ≥ 35 patients may be offset by pretransplant care cost reduction. Despite shifting organs to critically ill patients, Share 35 has not impacted mortality significantly. Liver Transplantation 23:11-18 2017 AASLD.

Tackling the burden of the hepatitis C virus in the UK: characterizing and assessing the clinical and economic consequences.

OBJECTIVES: The hepatitis C virus (HCV) remains a significant public health issue. This study aimed to quantify the clinical and economic burden of chronic hepatitis C in the UK, stratified by disease severity, age and awareness of infection, with concurrent assessment of the impact of implementing a treatment prioritization approach. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A previously published back projection, natural history and cost-effectiveness HCV model was adapted to a UK setting to estimate the disease burden of chronic hepatitis C and end-stage liver disease (ESLD) between 1980 and 2035. A published meta-regression analysis informed disease progression, and UK-specific data informed other model inputs. RESULTS: At 2015, prevalence of chronic hepatitis C is estimated to be 241,487 with 22.20%, 33.72%, 17.22%, 16.67% and 10.19% of patients in METAVIR stages F0, F1, F2, F3 and F4, respectively, but is estimated to fall to 193,999 by 2035. ESLD incidence is predicted to peak in 2031. Assuming all patients are diagnosed and treatment is prioritized in F3 and F4 using highly efficacious direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens, a 69.85% reduction in ESLD incidence is predicted between 2015 and 2035, and the cumulative discounted medical expenditure associated with the lifetime management of incident ESLD events is estimated to be £1,202,827,444. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of chronic hepatitis C is expected to fall in coming decades; however, the ongoing financial burden is expected to be high due to an increase in ESLD incidence. This study highlights the significant costs of managing ESLD that are likely to be incurred without the employment of effective treatment approaches.

Primary Biliary Cholangitis: Medical and Specialty Pharmacy Management Update.

BACKGROUND: Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), previously known as primary biliary cirrhosis and which has been designated an orphan condition, is a chronic autoimmune disease resulting in the destruction of the small bile ducts in the liver. Without effective treatment, disease progression frequently leads to liver failure and death. Until May 2016, the only FDA-approved treatment for PBC was ursodiol (UDCA), an oral hydrophilic bile acid, which can slow progression of liver damage due to PBC. However, 1 out of 3 patients taking UDCA has an inadequate biochemical response, leading to increased risk of disease progression, liver transplantation, and mortality. Given this unmet clinical need, new therapies are in development for the treatment of PBC. To provide pharmacists with an overview of the latest research on the pathophysiology of PBC and potential new treatment options and to highlight medical and specialty pharmacy approaches to managing access to drugs to treat orphan diseases such as PBC, a 2-hour satellite symposium was presented in conjunction with the 2015 Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) Nexus meeting. Although obeticholic acid was approved by the FDA for the treatment of PBC in May 2016, this development occurred after the symposium presentation. The symposium was supported by an independent educational grant from Intercept Pharmaceuticals and was managed by Analysis Group. Robert Navarro, PharmD, moderated the CPE-accredited symposium titled "Medical and Specialty Pharmacy Management Update on Primary Biliary Cirrhosis." Expert panelists included Christopher L. Bowlus, MD; James T. Kenney, RPh, MBA; and Gary Rice, RPh, MS, MBA, CSP. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the educational satellite symposium presentations and discussions. SUMMARY: Autoimmune liver diseases, including PBC, are responsible for 15% of all liver transplants performed and an equal percentage of deaths related to liver disease. UDCA is the only FDA-approved therapy for treatment of PBC and is considered the standard of care. Nevertheless, many patients do not respond to UDCA, creating the need for new therapeutic options to improve clinical outcomes for PBC patients with inadequate response to treatment. While several agents are being studied in combination with UDCA, monotherapy with the novel agent obeticholic acid, a farnesoid X receptor agonist, has also shown promising results. Health plans are anticipated to assign any newly introduced therapy for the treatment of PBC to specialty pharmacy given its orphan disease status. This assignment enables the health plan to receive disease education, which is particularly important when new drugs are indicated for orphan diseases, and assistance with designing appropriate prior authorization criteria. The clinical value of any new therapeutic options that will inform formulary decisions and prior authorization criteria will be assessed based on evidence of efficacy, safety, and tolerability, among other factors, such as the potential to reduce or delay medical resource utilization (e.g., liver transplant). Key considerations for prior authorization of a new therapy will be determining which PBC patients are appropriate candidates for the new therapy and developing criteria for that determination. These are likely to include clinical diagnostic criteria and degree of response to prior treatment with UDCA. Initially, any new therapy would likely be positioned as noncovered until appropriate prior authorization criteria are established. CONCLUSIONS: PBC is a chronic liver disease with significant morbidity and mortality, as well as a significant burden on the health care system if the disease progresses to the point at which a liver transplant is needed. Although UDCA, the current standard of care, has improved outcomes for many patients, others have an inadequate response to this treatment. This symposium discussed these issues and also addressed the overall treatment paradigm for orphan drug therapies, key implications for patient management, and the role of specialty pharmacy management and any associated needs both in general and specifically for new therapeutic options for PBC.