Retrospective cross-sectional pilot study of rifaximin dosing for the prevention of recurrent hepatic encephalopathy.

Standard treatment for hepatic encephalopathy (HE) includes medications that reduce ammonia and bacterial translocation in the gut. Rifaximin can be used off-label for the reduction of overt HE. The study purpose was to determine efficacy of traditional rifaximin dosing (400 mg three times daily) compared with newer dosing (550 mg twice daily) via readmission rates for the prevention of recurrent HE. This was a retrospective, observational, cross-sectional pilot study conducted in a tertiary medical center. A total of 226 patients 18-89 years of age with documentation of HE via ICD-9 code who started rifaximin therapy while inpatient between April 2009 and June 2014 were evaluated. Data collected included rifaximin dosing, other medications used to treat HE, duration of therapy, time to readmission, and various laboratory values. There were no differences in readmission rates at 30 days, 60 days, or 6 months between treatment groups. Additionally, there was no difference in the odds of readmission between the treatment groups (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: [0.201, 4.365], P = 0.718). Patients had a low overall probability of readmission over the observational period. Based on average wholesale price data, the cost for a 9-day supply of rifaximin for the 400-mg dosing regimen is $952.56 versus $605.16 for the 550-mg dosing regimen. The rifaximin 550-mg dosing strategy should be utilized in hospitalized patients for the prevention of recurrent HE as there was no difference in readmission rate or time to readmission between dosing groups. The 550-mg regimen had a lower acquisition cost for a 9-day duration of treatment in the studied institution.

Diagnosis and treatment of minimal hepatic encephalopathy to prevent motor vehicle accidents: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

UNLABELLED: Minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE) in cirrhosis is associated with impaired driving skills and increased risk of motor vehicle accidents (MVAs). Detection and treatment of MHE has the potential to reduce costs and morbidity associated with MVAs. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to assess the benefits of different strategies of MHE diagnosis and treatment for reducing MVA-related societal costs. The analyses compared five MHE management strategies: (1) presumptive treatment of all cirrhosis patients; (2) diagnosis by neuropsychological exam (NPE) with treatment; (3) diagnosis by standard psychometric tests (SPTs) with treatment; (4) diagnosis by rapid screening using inhibitory control test (ICT) with treatment; and (5) no MHE diagnosis or treatment (status quo). Treatments considered were lactulose or rifaximin, which were assumed to reduce the MVA rate to the level of similarly aged noncirrhosis patients with benefit adjusted for treatment compliance. A Markov model followed a simulated cohort of 1,000 cirrhosis patients without overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE), from entry into treatment, through MHE development, and later OHE, when they exited the modeled cohort. Follow-up was for 5 years and included biannual MHE testing. The societal cost of a single MVA was estimated at $42,100. All four strategies with lactulose were cost-saving compared with the status quo. Diagnosis with ICT and lactulose was the most cost-effective approach (cost/MVA prevented: $24,454 ICT; $25,470 SPT; $30,469 presumptive treatment and $33,742 NPE). Net program savings over 5 years ranged from $1.7 to 3.6 million depending on the strategy. Rifaximin therapy was not cost-saving at current prices but would become so at a monthly cost of <$353. CONCLUSION: Detection of MHE, especially using the ICT, and subsequent treatment with lactulose could substantially reduce societal costs by preventing MVAs.

Rifaximin for the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy.

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a complication of cirrhosis, the severity of which can range from subtle, neurocognitive dysfunction (minimal HE) to more apparent and severe cognitive and motor manifestations with increasing grades of the condition (overt HE). Current treatment options are targeted at reducing the levels of ammonia and other gut-derived toxins, the purported culprits behind the pathogenesis of HE. One of these therapeutic options, the nonsystemic antibiotic rifaximin, is efficacious for the treatment of minimal and overt HE. However, HE may be a cyclic condition in which patients with overt HE enter remission following treatment and then relapse. Thus, safe, effective and well-tolerated treatments are needed to maintain HE remission. Rifaximin maintained HE remission more effectively than placebo in a large, randomized controlled trial. Rifaximin is safe and well-tolerated for the treatment of minimal and overt HE and for the maintenance of HE remission.

Factors affecting compliance and persistence with treatment for hepatic encephalopathy.

Noncompliance with treatment protocols produces an increased burden on the health care system. Reports show that 23% of annual admissions to nursing homes in the United States (380,000 patients) are due to noncompliance, resulting in overall costs of over $31 billion. More than 10% of all patients (3.5 million) are hospitalized each year due to complications related to noncompliance, with over $15 billion spent. In addition, nearly half of the 2 billion prescriptions filled each year are not taken correctly. Patients with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy who are prescribed lactulose experience a greater frequency of adverse effects, require more hospitalizations, and suffer more disease recurrence than those prescribed rifaximin.

Pharmacoeconomics of hepatic encephalopathy.

Understanding and appreciating the science of pharmacoeconomics have become even more important for health care providers and insurers during the recent economic downturn. Evaluating the true costs of any disease is complex; both direct costs, such as costs of drug therapy and the provision of care, and indirect costs, such as lost earnings and reduced quality of life, must be taken into account. With chronic liver disease, the most recent data indicate that direct costs were more than $2 billion whereas indirect costs were more than $450 million. Hepatic encephalopathy, a common complication of chronic liver disease, contributes to this economic burden. Although patients' length of stay during hospitalization for hepatic encephalopathy decreased from almost 9 days to 6 days (and has remained stable over the past few years) from 1993 to 2007, hospitalization costs rose from $13,000 to $30,000/hospital stay. In addition, 22% of patients were discharged directly to nursing homes or rehabilitation centers, which increases total costs. When assessing therapy for hepatic encephalopathy, it is important to consider the total costs of the disease, not just treatment costs. Although more expensive on a daily basis than lactulose, rifaximin has been shown to reduce hospitalization rates, has a better adverse-effect profile, and increases patient compliance. One study found that rifaximin produced a cost savings/patient/year of more than $3000 over lactulose therapy.

The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of competing therapies in hepatic encephalopathy - a decision analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for hepatic encephalopathy have disparate risks and benefits. Non-absorbable disaccharides and neomycin are limited by uncertain efficacy and common dose-limiting side effects. In contrast, rifaximin is safe and effective in hepatic encephalopathy, but is more expensive. METHODS: We conducted a decision analysis to calculate the cost-effectiveness of six strategies in hepatic encephalopathy: (i) no hepatic encephalopathy treatment, (ii) lactulose monotherapy, (iii) lactitol monotherapy, (iv) neomycin monotherapy, (v) rifaximin monotherapy and (vi) up-front lactulose with crossover to rifaximin if poor response or intolerance of lactulose ('rifaximin salvage'). The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS: Under base-case conditions, 'do nothing' was least effective and rifaximin salvage was most effective. Lactulose monotherapy was least expensive, and rifaximin monotherapy was most expensive. When balancing cost and effectiveness, lactulose monotherapy and rifaximin salvage dominated alternative strategies. Compared to lactulose monotherapy, rifaximin salvage cost an incremental US$2315 per quality-adjusted life-year-gained. The cost of rifaximin had to fall below US$1.03/tab in order for rifaximin monotherapy to dominate lactulose monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Rifaximin monotherapy is not cost-effective in the treatment of chronic hepatic encephalopathy at current average wholesale prices. However, a hybrid salvage strategy, reserving rifaximin for lactulose-refractory patients, may be highly cost-effective.

Hospitalizations during the use of rifaximin versus lactulose for the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy.

We sought to compare frequency and duration of hepatic encephalopathy-related hospitalizations during rifaximin versus lactulose treatment. Hospitalizations, clinical efficacy data, and adverse events obtained from charts of 145 patients with hepatic encephalopathy who received lactulose (30 cc twice daily) for > or = 6 months and then rifaximin (400 mg 3 times a day) for > or = 6 months compared last 6 months on lactulose (lactulose period) to first 6 months on rifaximin (rifaximin period). Fewer hospitalizations (0.5 versus 1.6; P < .001), fewer days hospitalized (2.5 versus 7.3; P < .001), fewer total weeks hospitalized (0.4 versus 1.8; P < .001), and lower hospitalization charges per patient ($14,222 versus $56,635) were reported during the rifaximin period. More patients had asterixis, diarrhea, flatulence, and abdominal pain during the lactulose period (P < .001). Treatment of hepatic encephalopathy with rifaximin was associated with lower hospitalization frequency and duration, lower hospital charges, better clinical status, and fewer adverse events.