162 research outputs found

    Economic Evaluation of Different Organizational Models for the Management of Patients with Hepatitis C

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Access to Directly Acting Antivirals (DAAs) for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) treatment in Italy was initially restricted to severe patients. In 2017, AIFA expanded access to all patients, to achieve elimination by 2030.AIM: To investigate the impact of different hospitals’ organizational models on elimination timing, treatment capacity and direct costs.METHODS: Most Regional healthcare systems in Italy deploy a Center of Excellence (CoE) organizational model, where patients are referred to a single major hospital in the area, which is the only one that can prescribe and deliver DAAs. The study was conducted at Bergamo’s (Lombardy, Italy) Papa Giovanni XXIII hospital (PG-23), which deploys a Hub&Spoke model: the Hub (PG-23) prescribes and delivers DAAs while Spokes (four smaller hospitals) can only prescribe them. The study compares the two models (CoE vs. H&S). Patient journey and workloads were mapped and quantified through interviews with hospital stakeholders. Cost data were collected through the hospital’s IT system; the sample comprised 2,277 HCV patients, over one year.RESULTS: The study calculated the average cost to treat HCV patients (~ € 1,470 per patient). Key cost drivers are lab tests (60%) and specialist visits (30%). Over one year, H&S can treat 68% more patients than CoE. As deferred patients absorb up to 40% of total costs, the “Optimized” model was designed by streamlining specialists’ visits and involving general practitioners during follow-up. “Optimized” model increases treatment capacity and reduces costs of deferred patients by 72% vs CoE.CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates the importance of organizational models in efficiently achieving 2030 elimination

    The societal burden of chronic liver diseases: results from the COME study.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: Chronic liver diseases (CLDs) impose a significant socioeconomic burden on patients and the healthcare system, but to what extent remains underexplored. We estimated costs and health-related-quality-of-life (HRQoL) among patients with CLDs at different stages and with different aetiologies. DESIGN: A cost-of-illness study was conducted. Direct costs, productivity loss and HRQoL were estimated in patients with chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or where orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) had been performed, for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, or in those with liver disease from other causes. Patients were retrospectively observed for 6 months. The societal perspective was adopted to calculate costs. RESULTS: In total, 1088 valid patients (median age=59.5 years, 60% men) were enrolled. 61% had chronic hepatitis, 20% cirrhosis, 8% HCC and 12% underwent OLT. HCV infection was identified in 52% and HBV infection in 29% of the patients. Adjusted mean direct costs increased from €3000/patient-month in HBV infected patients with OLT. Antiviral treatment was the cost driver in patients with hepatitis, while hospital costs were the driver in the other subgroups. Absenteeism increased from HBV-infected patients with hepatitis (0.7 day/patient-month) to patients with OLT with other aetiologies (3.7 days/patient-month). HRQoL was on average more compromised in cirrhosis and patients with HCC, than in hepatitis and patients with OLT. HBV-infected patients generated higher direct costs, patients with other aetiologies generated the highest productivity loss and HCV-infected patients reported the worst HRQoL levels. CONCLUSIONS: The present study can be considered a benchmark for future research and to guide policies aimed at maximising the cost-effective of the interventions

    Treatment of recurrent genotype 4 hepatitis C after liver transplantation: early virological response is predictive of sustained virological response. An AISF RECOLT-C group study

    Get PDF
    Introduction. Hepatitis C virus genotype 4 is predominant in the Middle East and Northern Africa, even if it has recently spread to Southern Europe. Data about the treatment of post-liver transplantation (LT) genotype 4 hepatitis C recurrence are scarce. We report a retrospective analysis of post-LT genotype 4 hepatitis C treatment in 9 Italian transplant centres, focusing on the overall survival rates and treatment outcome. Results. Among 452 recipients, we identified 17 HCV genotype 4 patients (16 males, 1 female) transplanted between 1998 and 2007. All patients received combined antiviral treatment with conventional doses of interferon (recombinant or pegylated) and ribavirin after histological diagnosis of hepatitis C recurrence. The observed overall survival after LT was 100% at 1 year and 83.3% at 5 years. More than 1/3 (35.3%) of patients achieved a sustained virological response (SVR) and 40% (data available in 15 subjects) an early virological response (EVR), which was significantly associated with the achievement of SVR (overall accuracy: 85.7%; predictive values of EVR absence/presence 80/88.8%; chi-square p < 0.05). Conclusion. In conclusion, in post-LT genotype 4 hepatitis C treatment, SVR rates are similar to genotype 1. Patients who don't show an EVR are not likely to achieve a SVR

    Daclatasvir-based regimens in HCV cirrhosis: experience from the Italian early access program

    Get PDF
    We reported the efficacy and safety data for daclatasvir (DCV)-based all-oral antiviral therapy in patients treated in the Italian compassionate-use program. 275 patients were included (202 male-73.5%, mean age: 57.4 years, 62 HIV-coinfected, 94 with recurrence of hepatitis C post-OLT). Forty-nine patients (17.8%) had Child-Pugh B, Genotype(G) distribution was: G1a:72 patients (26.2%), G1b:137 (49.8%); G3:40 (14.5%) and G4:26 (9.5%). Patients received DCV with sofosbuvir(SOF) (n\u2009=\u2009221, 129 with ribavirin(RBV) or with simeprevir (SMV) or asunaprevir (ASU) (n\u2009=\u200954, 19 with RBV) for up to 24 weeks. Logistic regression was used to identify baseline characteristics associated with sustained virological response at week 12 post-treatment (SVR12). Liver function changes between baseline and follow up were assessed in 228 patients. 240 patients achieved SVR12 (87.3%), post transplant and HIV co-infected patients were equally distributed among SVR and no SVR (35% vs 34.3%; p\u2009=\u20090.56 and 24.2% vs 11.4%, p\u2009=\u20090.13, respectively). SVR rate was significantly higher with the combination DCV\u2009+\u2009SOF compared with DCV\u2009+\u2009SIM or ASU (93.2% vs 63.0%, p\u2009<\u20090.0001). Bilirubin value (OR: 0.69, CI95%: 0.54-0.87, p\u2009=\u20090.002) and regimen containing SOF (OR: 9.99, CI95%: 4.09-24.40; p\u2009<\u20090.001) were independently related with SVR. Mean albumin and bilirubin values significantly improved between baseline and follow-up week 12. DCV-based antiviral therapy was well tolerated and resulted in a high SVR when combined with SOF either in pre-transplant and in OLT patients and in "difficult to treat" HCV genotypes. Regimens containing DCV in combination with NS3 protease inhibitors obtained suboptimal results

    Delisting of liver transplant candidates with chronic hepatitis C after viral eradication: A European study

    Get PDF
    International audienceBACKGROUND & AIMS:All oral direct acting antivirals (DAA) have been shown to improve the liver function of patients with decompensated cirrhosis but it is presently unknown whether this clinical improvement may lead to the delisting of some patients. The aim of this study was to assess if and which patients can be first inactivated due to clinically improvement and subsequently delisted in a real life setting.METHODS:103 consecutive listed patients without hepatocellular carcinoma were treated with different DAA combinations in 11 European centres between February 2014 and February 2015.RESULTS:The cumulative incidence of inactivated and delisted patients by competing risk analysis was 15.5% and 0% at 24weeks, 27.6% and 10.3% at 48weeks, 33.3% and 19.2% at 60weeks. The 34 patients who were inactivated showed a median improvement of 3.4 points for MELD (delta MELD, p20:HR=0.042; p<0.0001), delta MELD (HR=1.349; p<0.0001) and delta albumin (HR=0.307; p=0.0069) both assessed after 12weeks of DAA therapy.CONCLUSIONS:This study showed that all oral DAAs were able to reverse liver dysfunction and favoured the inactivation and delisting of about one patient out-of-three and one patient out-of-five in 60weeks, respectively. Patients with lower MELD scores had higher chances to be delisted. The longer term benefits of therapy need to be ascertained.LAY SUMMARY:The excellent efficacy and safety profile of the new drugs against Hepatitis C virus, "direct acting antivirals" or DAAs, have made antiviral therapy possible also for patients with advanced liver disease and for those on the waiting list for liver transplantation (LT). This study shows for the first time that the DAAs may lead to a remarkable clinical improvement allowing the delisting of one patient out of 5

    Effects of immunosuppressive drugs on COVID-19 severity in patients with autoimmune hepatitis

    Get PDF
    Background: We investigated associations between baseline use of immunosuppressive drugs and severity of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Patients and methods: Data of AIH patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 were retrospectively collected from 15 countries. The outcomes of AIH patients who were on immunosuppression at the time of COVID-19 were compared to patients who were not on AIH medication. The clinical courses of COVID-19 were classified as (i)-no hospitalization, (ii)-hospitalization without oxygen supplementation, (iii)-hospitalization with oxygen supplementation by nasal cannula or mask, (iv)-intensive care unit (ICU) admission with non-invasive mechanical ventilation, (v)-ICU admission with invasive mechanical ventilation or (vi)-death and analysed using ordinal logistic regression. Results: We included 254 AIH patients (79.5%, female) with a median age of 50 (range, 17-85) years. At the onset of COVID-19, 234 patients (92.1%) were on treatment with glucocorticoids (n = 156), thiopurines (n = 151), mycophenolate mofetil (n = 22) or tacrolimus (n = 16), alone or in combinations. Overall, 94 (37%) patients were hospitalized and 18 (7.1%) patients died. Use of systemic glucocorticoids (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.73, 95% CI 1.12-25.89) and thiopurines (aOR 4.78, 95% CI 1.33-23.50) for AIH was associated with worse COVID-19 severity, after adjusting for age-sex, comorbidities and presence of cirrhosis. Baseline treatment with mycophenolate mofetil (aOR 3.56, 95% CI 0.76-20.56) and tacrolimus (aOR 4.09, 95% CI 0.69-27.00) were also associated with more severe COVID-19 courses in a smaller subset of treated patients. Conclusion: Baseline treatment with systemic glucocorticoids or thiopurines prior to the onset of COVID-19 was significantly associated with COVID-19 severity in patients with AIH.Fil: Efe, Cumali. Harran University Hospita; TurquíaFil: Lammert, Craig. University School of Medicine Indianapolis; Estados UnidosFil: Taşçılar, Koray. Universitat Erlangen-Nuremberg; AlemaniaFil: Dhanasekaran, Renumathy. University of Stanford; Estados UnidosFil: Ebik, Berat. Gazi Yasargil Education And Research Hospital; TurquíaFil: Higuera de la Tijera, Fatima. Hospital General de México; MéxicoFil: Calışkan, Ali R.. No especifíca;Fil: Peralta, Mirta. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital de Infecciosas "Dr. Francisco Javier Muñiz"; ArgentinaFil: Gerussi, Alessio. Università degli Studi di Milano; ItaliaFil: Massoumi, Hatef. No especifíca;Fil: Catana, Andreea M.. Harvard Medical School; Estados UnidosFil: Purnak, Tugrul. University of Texas; Estados UnidosFil: Rigamonti, Cristina. Università del Piemonte Orientale ; ItaliaFil: Aldana, Andres J. G.. Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota; ColombiaFil: Khakoo, Nidah. Miami University; Estados UnidosFil: Nazal, Leyla. Clinica Las Condes; ChileFil: Frager, Shalom. Montefiore Medical Center; Estados UnidosFil: Demir, Nurhan. Haseki Training And Research Hospital; TurquíaFil: Irak, Kader. Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training And Research Hospital; TurquíaFil: Melekoğlu Ellik, Zeynep. Ankara University Medical Faculty; TurquíaFil: Kacmaz, Hüseyin. Adıyaman University; TurquíaFil: Balaban, Yasemin. Hacettepe University; TurquíaFil: Atay, Kadri. No especifíca;Fil: Eren, Fatih. No especifíca;Fil: Alvares da-Silva, Mario R.. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Cristoferi, Laura. Università degli Studi di Milano; ItaliaFil: Urzua, Álvaro. Universidad de Chile; ChileFil: Eşkazan, Tuğçe. Cerrahpaşa School of Medicine; TurquíaFil: Magro, Bianca. No especifíca;Fil: Snijders, Romee. No especifíca;Fil: Barutçu, Sezgin. No especifíca;Fil: Lytvyak, Ellina. University of Alberta; CanadáFil: Zazueta, Godolfino M.. Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubiran; MéxicoFil: Demirezer Bolat, Aylin. Ankara City Hospital; TurquíaFil: Aydın, Mesut. Van Yuzuncu Yil University; TurquíaFil: Amorós Martín, Alexandra Noemí. No especifíca;Fil: De Martin, Eleonora. No especifíca;Fil: Ekin, Nazım. No especifíca;Fil: Yıldırım, Sümeyra. No especifíca;Fil: Yavuz, Ahmet. No especifíca;Fil: Bıyık, Murat. Necmettin Erbakan University; TurquíaFil: Narro, Graciela C.. Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubiran; MéxicoFil: Bıyık, Murat. Uludag University; TurquíaFil: Kıyıcı, Murat. No especifíca;Fil: Kahramanoğlu Aksoy, Evrim. No especifíca;Fil: Vincent, Maria. No especifíca;Fil: Carr, Rotonya M.. University of Pennsylvania; Estados UnidosFil: Günşar, Fulya. No especifíca;Fil: Reyes, Eira C.. Hepatology Unit. Hospital Militar Central de México; MéxicoFil: Harputluoğlu, Murat. Inönü University School of Medicine; TurquíaFil: Aloman, Costica. Rush University Medical Center; Estados UnidosFil: Gatselis, Nikolaos K.. University Hospital Of Larissa; GreciaFil: Üstündağ, Yücel. No especifíca;Fil: Brahm, Javier. Clinica Las Condes; ChileFil: Vargas, Nataly C. E.. Hospital Nacional Almanzor Aguinaga Asenjo; PerúFil: Güzelbulut, Fatih. No especifíca;Fil: Garcia, Sandro R.. Hospital Iv Víctor Lazarte Echegaray; PerúFil: Aguirre, Jonathan. Hospital Angeles del Pedregal; MéxicoFil: Anders, Margarita. Hospital Alemán; ArgentinaFil: Ratusnu, Natalia. Hospital Regional de Ushuaia; ArgentinaFil: Hatemi, Ibrahim. No especifíca;Fil: Mendizabal, Manuel. Universidad Austral; ArgentinaFil: Floreani, Annarosa. Università di Padova; ItaliaFil: Fagiuoli, Stefano. No especifíca;Fil: Silva, Marcelo. Universidad Austral; ArgentinaFil: Idilman, Ramazan. No especifíca;Fil: Satapathy, Sanjaya K.. No especifíca;Fil: Silveira, Marina. University of Yale. School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Drenth, Joost P. H.. No especifíca;Fil: Dalekos, George N.. No especifíca;Fil: N.Assis, David. University of Yale. School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Björnsson, Einar. No especifíca;Fil: Boyer, James L.. University of Yale. School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Yoshida, Eric M.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Invernizzi, Pietro. Università degli Studi di Milano; ItaliaFil: Levy, Cynthia. University of Miami; Estados UnidosFil: Montano Loza, Aldo J.. University of Alberta; CanadáFil: Schiano, Thomas D.. No especifíca;Fil: Ridruejo, Ezequiel. Universidad Austral; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. CEMIC-CONICET. Centro de Educaciones Médicas e Investigaciones Clínicas "Norberto Quirno". CEMIC-CONICET; ArgentinaFil: Wahlin, Staffan. No especifíca

    Monogenic diseases that can be cured by liver transplantation

    Get PDF
    While the prevalence of most diseases caused by single-gene mutations is low and defines them as rare conditions, all together, monogenic diseases account for approximately 10 in every 1000 births according to the World Health Organisation. Orthotopic liver transplantation (LT) could offer a therapeutic option in monogenic diseases in two ways: by substituting for an injured liver or by supplying a tissue that can replace a mutant protein. In this respect, LT may be regarded as the correction of a disease at the level of the dysfunctional protein. Monogenic diseases that involve the liver represent a heterogeneous group of disorders. In conditions associated with predominant liver parenchymal damage (i.e., genetic cholestatic disorders, Wilson's disease, hereditary hemochromatosis, tyrosinemia, α1 antitrypsin deficiency), hepatic complications are the major source of morbidity and LT not only replaces a dysfunctional liver but also corrects the genetic defect and effectively cures the disease. A second group includes liver-based genetic disorders characterised by an architecturally near-normal liver (urea cycle disorders, Crigler-Najjar syndrome, familial amyloid polyneuropathy, primary hyperoxaluria type 1, atypical haemolytic uremic syndrome-1). In these defects, extrahepatic complications are the main source of morbidity and mortality while liver function is relatively preserved. Combined transplantation of other organs may be required, and other surgical techniques, such as domino and auxiliary liver transplantation, have been attempted. In a third group of monogenic diseases, the underlying genetic defect is expressed at a systemic level and liver involvement is just one of the clinical manifestations. In these conditions, LT might only be partially curative since the abnormal phenotype is maintained by extrahepatic synthesis of the toxic metabolites (i.e., methylmalonic acidemia, propionic acidemia). This review focuses on principles of diagnosis, management and LT results in both paediatric and adult populations of selected liver-based monogenic diseases, which represent examples of different transplantation strategies, driven by the understanding of the expression of the underlying genetic defect. © 2013 European Association for the Study of the Liver

    Hepatic encephalopathy increases the risk for mortality and hospital readmission in decompensated cirrhotic patients: a prospective multicenter study

    No full text
    IntroductionHepatic encephalopathy (HE) affects the survival and quality of life of patients with cirrhosis. However, longitudinal data on the clinical course after hospitalization for HE are lacking. The aim was to estimate mortality and risk for hospital readmission of cirrhotic patients hospitalized for HE. MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 112 consecutive cirrhotic patients hospitalized for HE (HE group) at 25 Italian referral centers. A cohort of 256 patients hospitalized for decompensated cirrhosis without HE served as controls (no HE group). After hospitalization for HE, patients were followed-up for 12 months until death or liver transplant (LT). ResultsDuring follow-up, 34 patients (30.4%) died and 15 patients (13.4%) underwent LT in the HE group, while 60 patients (23.4%) died and 50 patients (19.5%) underwent LT in the no HE group. In the whole cohort, age (HR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06), HE (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.08-2.56), ascites (HR 2.56, 95% CI 1.55-4.23), and sodium levels (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.99) were significant risk factors for mortality. In the HE group, ascites (HR 5.07, 95% CI 1.39-18.49) and BMI (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.98) were risk factors for mortality, and HE recurrence was the first cause of hospital readmission. ConclusionIn patients hospitalized for decompensated cirrhosis, HE is an independent risk factor for mortality and the most common cause of hospital readmission compared with other decompensation events. Patients hospitalized for HE should be evaluated as candidates for LT
    corecore