Maximizing Opportunities and Avoiding Mistakes in Triple Therapy for Hepatitis C Virus

Recently developed drugs and innovative strategies for the treatment of chronic infection with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus (HCV) have become the standard of care. The protease inhibitors telaprevir (Incivek) and boceprevir (Victrelis) are the first direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents approved, and many more are being developed. These drugs substantially increased rates of sustained virologic response in treatment-naïve and -experienced patients, in conjunction with peginterferon and ribavirin (triple therapy), in phase 3 trials. The efficacy of triple therapy depends on appropriate selection of patients, although the population of patients that receive triple therapy could be expanded as the risk/benefit ratio improves. Attention to details that reflect the standard of care, such as appropriate dosing, anticipation of adverse effects, and strict adherence to stopping rules, will insure the success of these drugs and lead the way for new combination therapies

Paracentesis is Associated with Reduced Mortality in Patients Hospitalized with Cirrhosis and Ascites

Diagnostic paracentesis is recommended for patients with cirrhosis admitted to the hospital for ascites or encephalopathy. However, it is not known if clinicians in the United States adhere to this recommendation; a relationship between paracentesis and clinical outcome has not been reported. We analyzed a US database to determine the frequency of paracentesis and its association with mortality. Methods The 2009 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (which contains data from approximately 8 million hospital discharges each year) was used to identify patients with cirrhosis and ascites admitted with a primary diagnosis of ascites or encephalopathy. In-hospital mortality, length of stay, and hospital charges were compared for those who did and did not undergo paracentesis. Outcomes were compared for those who received an early paracentesis (within 1 day of admission) and those who received one later. Results Of 17,711 eligible admissions, only 61% underwent paracentesis. In-hospital mortality was reduced by 24% among patients who underwent paracentesis (6.5% vs 8.5%, adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41–0.74). Most paracenteses (66%) occurred ≤1 day after admission. In-hospital mortality was lower among patients who received early paracentesis than those who received it later (5.7% vs 8.1%; P=.049), although this difference was not significant after adjustment for confounders (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.78–2.02). Among patients who underwent paracentesis, the mean hospital stay was 14% longer, and hospital charges were 29% greater than for patients that did not receive the procedure. Conclusions Paracentesis is underused for patients admitted to the hospital with ascites; the procedure is associated with increased short-term survival. These data support practice guidelines derived from expert opinion. Studies are needed to identify barriers to guideline adherence

Detective Work in Drug-Induced Liver Injury: Sometimes It Is All About Interviewing the Right Witness

Diagnosing drug-induced liver injury (DILI) relies on history as there are no definitive diagnostic tests. We report four cases where DILI was missed or the drug misidentified when physicians relied solely on patient history

Predicting Liver Transplant Capacity Using Discrete Event Simulation

The number of liver transplants (LTs) performed in the US increased until 2006 but has since declined despite an ongoing increase in demand. This decline may be due in part to decreased donor liver quality and increasing discard of poor-quality livers. We constructed a discrete event simulation (DES) model informed by current donor characteristics to predict future LT trends through the year 2030. The data source for our model is the United Network for Organ Sharing database, which contains patient-level information on all organ transplants performed in the US. Previous analysis showed that liver discard is increasing and that discarded organs are more often from donors who are older, are obese, have diabetes, and donated after cardiac death. Given that the prevalence of these factors is increasing, the DES model quantifies the reduction in the number of LTs performed through 2030. In addition, the model estimatesthe total number of future donors needed to maintain the current volume of LTs and the effect of a hypothetical scenario of improved reperfusion technology.We also forecast the number of patients on the waiting list and compare this with the estimated number of LTs to illustrate the impact that decreased LTs will have on patients needing transplants. By altering assumptions about the future donor pool, this model can be used to develop policy interventions to prevent a further decline in this lifesaving therapy. To our knowledge, there are no similar predictive models of future LT use based on epidemiological trends

Trends in Characteristics of Patients Listed for Liver Transplantation Will Lead to Higher Rates of Waitlist Removal Due to Clinical Deterioration

BACKGROUND: Changes in the epidemiology of end-stage liver disease may lead to increased risk of dropout from the liver transplant waitlist. Anticipating the future of liver transplant waitlist characteristics is vital when considering organ allocation policy. METHODS: We performed a discrete event simulation to forecast patient characteristics and rate of waitlist dropout. Estimates were simulated from 2015 to 2025. The model was informed by data from the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network, 2003 to 2014. National data are estimated along with forecasts for 2 regions. RESULTS: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis will increase from 18% of waitlist additions to 22% by 2025. Hepatitis C will fall from 30% to 21%. Listings over age 60 years will increase from 36% to 48%. The hazard of dropout will increase from 41% to 46% nationally. Wait times for transplant for patients listed with a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) between 22 and 27 will double. Region 5, which transplants at relatively higher MELD scores, will experience an increase from 53% to 64% waitlist dropout. Region 11, which transplants at lower MELD scores, will have an increase in waitlist dropout from 30% to 44%. CONCLUSIONS: The liver transplant waitlist size will remain static over the next decade due to patient dropout. Liver transplant candidates will be older, more likely to have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and will wait for transplantation longer even when listed at a competitive MELD score. There will continue to be significant heterogeneity among transplant regions where some patients will be more likely to drop out of the waitlist than receive a transplant

Declining liver graft quality threatens the future of liver transplantation in the United States

National liver transplantation (LT) volume has declined since 2006, in part because of worsening donor organ quality. Trends that degrade organ quality are expected to continue over the next 2 decades. We used the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database to inform a 20-year discrete event simulation estimating LT volume from 2010 to 2030. Data to inform the model were obtained from deceased organ donors between 2000 and 2009. If donor liver utilization practices remain constant, utilization will fall from 78% to 44% by 2030, resulting in 2230 fewer LTs. If transplant centers increase their risk tolerance for marginal grafts, utilization would decrease to 48%. The institution of "opt-out" organ donation policies to increase the donor pool would still result in 1380 to 1866 fewer transplants. Ex vivo perfusion techniques that increase the use of marginal donor livers may stabilize LT volume. Otherwise, the number of LTs in the United States will decrease substantially over the next 15 years. In conclusion, the transplant community will need to accept inferior grafts and potentially worse posttransplant outcomes and/or develop new strategies for increasing organ donation and utilization in order to maintain the number of LTs at the current level

Average age and number of comorbidities by physician mix categories by year.

<p>Average age and number of comorbidities by physician mix categories by year.</p

Patient flow for selecting dually diagnosed patients.

<p>Patient flow for selecting dually diagnosed patients.</p

Average number of annual health care utilization among dually diagnosed patients, by physician mix category.

<p>Average number of annual health care utilization among dually diagnosed patients, by physician mix category.</p

Average number of annual visits to physician specialties among dually diagnosed patients, by physician mix category.

<p>Average number of annual visits to physician specialties among dually diagnosed patients, by physician mix category.</p