Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of rifaximin-α for the management of patients with hepatic encephalopathy in the United Kingdom

Barriers to Lactulose Adherence in Patients with Cirrhosis and Hepatic Encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in patients with cirrhosis. Lactulose non-adherence is one of the most frequently reported precipitants of hospital admission for HE.

AIMS

We aimed to identify which factors contribute most to lactulose non-adherence and propose strategies to promote greater adherence and utilization of lactulose.

METHODS

Participants in this study consisted of patients with cirrhosis who were taking lactulose for prevention of HE. Subjects were administered the Morisky Adherence Scale 8 (MAS-8) and a customized 16-question survey that assessed barriers to lactulose adherence. Results from the MAS-8 were used to stratify subjects into "adherent" and "non-adherent" groups. Survey responses were compared between groups.

RESULTS

We enrolled 129 patients in our study, of whom 45 were categorized as "adherent and 72 were categorized as "non-adherent." Barriers to adherence included large volumes of lactulose, high frequency of dosing, difficulty remembering to take the medication, unpleasant taste, and medication side-effects. Most patients (97%) expressed understanding of the importance of lactulose, and 71% of patients felt that lactulose was working to manage their HE. Hospital admission rates for HE was higher in non-adherent patients, although this difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

We identified several factors that contribute to lactulose non-adherence among patients treated for HE. Many of these factors are potentially modifiable. Patient and care-giver education are critical to assure adherence. Pharmacists and nurses are an essential but underutilized aspect of education regarding proper medication use.

Is rifaximin better than nonabsorbable disaccharides in hepatic encephalopathy?: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of rifaximin and nonabsorbable disaccharides (NADs) in hepatic encephalopathy (HE).

METHODS

After the registration of the present meta-analysis on INPLASY, all procedures were performed according to PRISMA 2020. Relevant literature was retrieved on PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to September 5, 2021. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the enrolled studies, and Review Manager software (version 5.3) was used to analyze the clinical efficacy, blood ammonia and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Six studies with 559 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the basic characteristics of the included studies. Analysis of the complete resolution of HE showed that rifaximin was better than NADs (risk ratio [RR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-3.39, P = .04). However, there were no significant differences in mental status (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.92-1.18, P = .53), blood ammonia level (standard mean difference = -0.02, 95% CI = -0.40-0.02, P = .08), or drug adverse drug effects (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.10-1.77, I2 = 56%, P = .24) between the rifaximin and NADs treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Rifaximin is not superior to NADs in the treatment of HE.

Efficacy of rifaximin, a poorly absorbed rifamycin antimicrobial agent, for hepatic encephalopathy in Japanese patients

AIM

Rifaximin is recommended as treatment for hepatic encephalopathy (HE) that targets intestinal bacterial flora. Although combined use with synthetic disaccharides is the standard of care worldwide, the therapeutic effects of rifaximin for overt encephalopathy (OHE) in Japanese patients have not been examined sufficiently. We examined the therapeutic effects of rifaximin for OHE in Japanese patients.

METHODS

A total of 76 patients who developed OHE of West Haven grade II or higher at least once within the 12 months before starting rifaximin were included. Blood ammonia levels and the incidence of OHE during the 12 months before and after starting rifaximin therapy were compared in a before-and-after study. Rifaximin efficacy and predictors of efficacy were also examined.

RESULTS

Post-treatment blood ammonia levels were significantly lower than pretreatment levels. The mean annual number of OHE incidents and intravenous branched-chain amino acid preparations used per patient were significantly lower after starting rifaximin therapy (2.51 vs. 0.76 times/year, p < 0.001; and 71.9 vs. 20.7 preparations/year, p = 0.003, respectively). The cumulative incidence of hospitalizations associated with HE significantly decreased after rifaximin therapy (hazard ratio 0.187; p < 0.001). The efficacy rate, defined as the proportion of patients without OHE during the administration of rifaximin for 1 year after starting rifaximin therapy, was 65.8%. Serum albumin ≥2.7 g/dl was an independent predictor of efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Rifaximin was associated with decreased blood ammonia levels, lower incidence of OHE, and fewer hospitalizations in Japanese patients with HE. In addition, serum albumin level was an important predictor on efficacy of rifaximin.

Budget impact of optimizing rifaximin-α use for the prevention of recurrent hepatic encephalopathy in The Netherlands

AIMS

Rifaximin-α as an adjunct to lactulose is reimbursed in the Netherlands for prevention of the third and subsequent episodes of overt Hepatic Encephalopathy (HE) in cirrhotic patients. However, use of rifaximin-α remains limited. This study evaluates the clinical and economic impact of treating all patients eligible under Dutch reimbursement conditions with rifaximin-α as an adjunct to lactulose for the prevention of overt HE in the Netherlands from a hospital and healthcare payer's perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A budget impact analysis was performed following national and international guidelines. Resource use was based on Dutch real-world data. HE-related cost inputs were based on the declaration codes, Dutch cost manual, and actual drug list prices. Several sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to assess model robustness.

RESULTS

Treating eligible HE patients with rifaximin-α in addition to lactulose saves €4,487 and costs €249 per patient over a 5-year period compared with lactulose monotherapy from hospital and healthcare payer's perspectives, respectively. In the Netherlands, an estimated 38% of the 2,567 eligible patients are currently being treated with rifaximin-α. Optimizing rifaximin-α use by treating all eligible patients with the rifaximin-α + lactulose could save more than 3,000 hospital admissions, almost 15,000 hospital bed days, and 300 deaths over a 5-year period. Despite increased drug costs, treatment is estimated to result in potential cost savings over a 5-year period of 7.2 million euros from a Dutch hospital perspective. The budget impact is 397,770 euros from a healthcare payer's perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

Next to a clinical perspective, also from an economic perspective, wider prescription of rifaximin-α adhering to guidelines could be beneficial to reduce costs from a hospital perspective. From a healthcare payer's perspective, costs increase with addition of rifaximin-α due to relative better survival causing relatively higher drug and liver transplantation-related costs.

Efficacy of rifaximin in the different clinical scenarios of hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy is a frequent complication in patients with cirrhosis of the liver and is associated with a high mortality rate. Costs attributed to the management of patients with cirrhosis are especially high due to complications, such as hepatic encephalopathy, given that they increase the number of days of hospital stay. Different drugs are currently used to treat hepatic encephalopathy, and the main ones are lactulose, L-ornithine L-aspartate (LOLA), and certain antibiotics, especially rifaximin-α (RFX). Even though many of them have been shown to be effective to greater or lesser degrees, it is important to understand the differences between them, so that every patient receives individualized treatment and the best option is chosen, in accordance with the different clinical scenarios. Thus, the aim of the present study was to analyze the evidence on the advantages and disadvantages of the individual or combined use of the 3 main treatments for hepatic encephalopathy, specifically taking into consideration their different degrees of efficacy, their impact on quality of life, prophylaxis, and cost reduction.