02.10.2015 Views

studies

2015SupplementFULLTEXT

2015SupplementFULLTEXT

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

924A AASLD ABSTRACTS HEPATOLOGY, October, 2015<br />

dasabuvir and ribavirin for 24 weeks (3D+R). This phase distributed<br />

patients into post-treatment disease states, including<br />

sustained virologic response (SVR), based on treatment efficacy.<br />

The second phase followed the cohort’s post-treatment<br />

progression through further liver fibrosis and death. Outcome<br />

measures included lifetime costs (medical and pharmaceutical),<br />

quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness<br />

ratios (ICERs) associated with each treatment. SVR<br />

and adverse event rates were based on phase III clinical trials.<br />

Transition probabilities, utilities and medical costs were<br />

extracted from published literature; treatment costs assumed<br />

100% adherence and reflected wholesale acquisition costs<br />

from December 2014 Red Book. Results: In a post liver-transplant<br />

setting, the use of 3D+R had the lowest discounted overall<br />

costs ($423,585) and highest gain in QALYs (11.3) compared<br />

to NT ($724,757 cost, 8.25 QALYs) or PR48 ($658,411 cost,<br />

8.73 QALYs). Use of 3D+R also generated net cost-savings<br />

for the healthcare system given the lower cost of this regimen<br />

($169,018) compared to the incremental discounted costs of<br />

NT ($301,172) and PR48 ($234,826). Conclusions: Compared<br />

to other regimens for treatment of post-liver transplant<br />

genotype 1 HCV recurrence, 3D+R is a cost-effective option<br />

that generates significantly higher quality-adjusted survival and<br />

lower costs. Use of 3D+R in the post-liver transplant population<br />

could also generate net cost savings for the healthcare system<br />

compared to previous standards of care.<br />

1463<br />

Gut Microbiota Alterations are an Independent Prognostic<br />

Factor for 90-day hospitalization in Cirrhosis<br />

Jasmohan S. Bajaj 1 , Naga Betrapally 2 , Douglas M. Heuman 1 , Melanie<br />

White 1 , Ariel Unser 1 , Edith A. Gavis 1 , Phillip B. Hylemon 1 ,<br />

Leroy Thacker 1 , Masoumeh Sikaroodi 2 , Patrick M. Gillevet 2 ; 1 VCU<br />

and McGuire VAMC, Richmond, VA; 2 Microbiome Analysis Center,<br />

Geoge Mason University, Manassas, VA<br />

Gut microbiota abnormalities (dysbiosis) worsens with the progression<br />

of cirrhosis in cross-sectional <strong>studies</strong>. However the<br />

impact of fecal dysbiosis on hospitalizations in cirrhotics is<br />

unclear. Aim: Define the association of dysbiosis with 90-day<br />

hospitalizations in cirrhosis. Methods: 284 cirrhotics (56 yrs,<br />

MELD 11, 35% alcohol, 38% prior HE, 30% Diabetes) underwent<br />

stool multi-tagged sequencing analysis to determine the<br />

relative microbial family abundances including beneficial commensals<br />

such as Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococceae & Clostridiales<br />

XIV. Subjects were followed for 90 days and non-elective<br />

hospitalizations were noted. Binary logistic regression using<br />

90-day hospitalizations as the dependent variable with MELD,<br />

PPI use, HE, alcohol etiology, diabetes, and bacteria significant<br />

on univariate analyses as predictors was performed.<br />

Results: Of the 284, 25 were lost to follow-up and 5 had elective<br />

hospitalizations. 94 (37%) were non-electively hospitalized<br />

within 90 days (median 35, IQR 21-78 days). The major<br />

(n=87) hospitalization reason were liver-related, thus no further<br />

sub-analysis was done(HE=46, Infection=14, Anasarca=13,<br />

GI bleed=10, others=4). Those who were hospitalized had<br />

a worse cirrhosis severity, were younger, and higher PPI use<br />

(Table). Alcoholic etiology was similar (25% vs. 18%, p=0.4).<br />

Stool microbiota showed a lower relative abundance of Bacteroidaceaeae<br />

(11% vs 26%, p=0.002), Lachnospiraceae (8%<br />

vs 14%,p=0.001), Ruminococceae (3% vs. 7%,p

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!