Short-Term Out-of-Pocket and Total Costs of Care After Ablation, Resection, or Transplant for Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A National SEER-Medicare Cost Comparison.

Background: Differences in survival and morbidity among treatment options (ablation, surgical resection, and transplant) for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been well-studied. Additional understanding of the costs of such care would help to identify drivers of high costs and potential barriers to care delivery. Objective: To quantify total and patient out-of-pocket costs for ablation, surgical resection, and transplant in the management of early-stage HCC and to identify factors predictive of these costs. Methods: This retrospective U.S. population-based study used the SEER-Medicare linked dataset to identify a sample of 1067 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 73 years; 674 men, 393 women) diagnosed with early-stage HCC (size ≤5 cm) treated with ablation (N=623), resection (N=201), or transplant (N=243) between January 2009 and December 2016. Total costs and patient out-of-pocket costs for the index procedure as well as for any care within 30 days and 90 days post-procedure were identified and stratified by treatment modality. Additional comparisons were performed among propensity-score matched subgroups of patients treated by ablation or resection (each N=172). Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify factors predictive of total costs and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30-day and 90-day post-procedure periods. Results: For ablation, resection, and transplant, median index-procedure total cost was $6689, $25,614, and $66,034; index-procedure out-of-pocket cost was $1235, $1650, and $1317; 30-day total cost was $9456, $29,754, and $69,856; 30-day out-of-pocket cost was $1646, $2208, and $3198; 90-day total cost was $14,572, $34,984, and $88,103; and 90-day out-of-pocket cost was $2138, $2462, and $3876, respectively (all p<.001). In propensity-matched subgroups, ablation and resection had median index-procedure, 30-day, and 90-day total costs of $6690 and $25,716, $9995 and $30,365, and $15,851 and $34,455, respectively. In multivariable analysis adjusting for socioeconomic factors, comorbidities, and liver-disease prognostic indicators, surgical treatment (resection or transplant) was predictive of significantly greater costs compared with ablation at all time points. Conclusion: Total and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30-day and 90-day post-procedure periods were lowest for ablation, followed by resection and then transplant. Clinical Impact: This comprehensive cost analysis could help inform future cost-effectiveness analyses.

Liver Severity Score-Based Modeling to Predict Six-Week Mortality Risk Among Hospitalized Cirrhosis Patients With Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Background: Patients with cirrhosis who have gastrointestinal bleeding have high short-term mortality, but the best modality for risk calculation remains in debate. Liver severity indices, such as Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) and Model-for-End-Stage-Liver Disease (MELD) score, are well-studied in portal hypertensive bleeding, but there is a paucity of data confirming their accuracy in non-portal hypertensive bleeding and overall acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), unrelated to portal hypertension. Aims: This study aims to better understand the accuracy of current mortality risk calculators in predicting mortality for patients with any type of UGIB, which could allow for earlier risk stratification and targeted intervention prior to endoscopy to identify the bleeding source. Methods: In a large US single-center cohort, we investigated and recalibrated the model performance of CTP and MELD scores to predict six-week mortality risk for both sources of UGIB (portal hypertensive and non-portal hypertensive). Results: Both CTP- and MELD-based models have excellent discrimination in predicting six-week mortality for all types of bleeding sources. However, only a CTP-based model demonstrates calibration for all bleeding, regardless of bleeding etiology. Median predicted 6-week mortality by CTP class A, B, and C estimates a risk of 1%, 7%, and 35% respectively. Conclusions: Our study corroborates findings in the literature that CTP- and MELD-based models have similar discriminative abilities for predicting 6-week mortality in hospitalized cirrhosis patients presenting with either portal hypertensive or non-portal hypertensive UGIB. CTP class is an effective clinical decision tool that can be used, even prior to endoscopy, to accurately risk stratify a patient with known cirrhosis presenting with any UGIB into low, moderate, and severe risk groupings.

The Impact of Metabolic Health and Obesity on Liver Transplant Candidates and Recipients.

Poor metabolic health and obesity have significant impacts on the outcomes of patients suffering from chronic liver disease, particularly those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. Patients with such comorbidities who require liver transplant evaluation for advancing liver disease or liver failure require special consideration due to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, renal dysfunction, sarcopenic obesity, and cancer. Those who have had a history of prior bariatric surgery pose specific anatomical constraints and may also be at increased risk of alcohol use disorder. Pre-operative risk assessment as well as strict control of metabolic risk factors are essential to reduce intra-operative and post-liver transplant complications. As immunosuppressive therapy exacerbates metabolic dysfunction and risk for cancer, post-liver transplant care must focus on balancing the need to prevent rejection and the impact of progressive metabolic dysfunction in this unique, but growing, patient population.

Pragmatic strategies to address health disparities along the continuum of care in chronic liver disease.

Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities exist in the prevalence and natural history of chronic liver disease, access to care, and clinical outcomes. Solutions to improve health equity range widely, from digital health tools to policy changes. The current review outlines the disparities along the chronic liver disease health care continuum from screening and diagnosis to the management of cirrhosis and considerations of pre-liver and post-liver transplantation. Using a health equity research and implementation science framework, we offer pragmatic strategies to address barriers to implementing high-quality equitable care for patients with chronic liver disease.