Search

Background and Aim: The increase in antibiotic resistance makes the eradication of Helicobacter pylori more difficult. Considering the limitations of the application of susceptibility-guided therapy, it is important to find an effective empirical regimen. The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of clarithromycin-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (C-BQT) and furazolidone-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (F-BQT) in naïve H. pylori positive patients., Methods: This was an open-label, randomized controlled, crossover trial. The trial comprised two phases. In C-F group, patients received C-BQT in the first phase; those who were still positive for H. pylori infection after the first phase entered the second phase to receive F-BQT as rescue treatment. In F-C group, patients were treated with F-BQT firstly and rescued with C-BQT., Results: As first-line treatments, the eradication rates of C-BQT and F-BQT were 89.7% (157/175) and 92.0% (161/175) (P = 0.458) in intention-to-treat analysis and 93.4% (156/167) and 95.8% (161/168) (P = 0.327) in per-protocol analysis, respectively. The cumulative eradication rates of the C-F group and the F-C group were both 94.3% in intention-to-treat analysis (P = 1.000). Cost-effectiveness indexes of F-BQT and C-BQT were 0.54 and 1.24 in first-line treatments. Frequencies of adverse events in F-BQT and C-BQT had no differences (36.0% in C-BQT vs 32.6% in F-BQT, P = 0.499)., Conclusions: Furazolidone-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy should be preferred for its excellent cost-effectiveness and acceptable safety., (© 2021 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Aims: To assess a persuasive multimodel approach to decreasing unnecessary intravenous (IV) clarithromycin use for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) hospitals., Methods: In December 2013, CDHB guidelines for empiric treatment of CAP changed to prioritise oral azithromycin over IV clarithromycin. The multimodel approach we used to implement this change included obtaining stakeholder agreement, improved guidelines access, education and pharmacist support. The impact of the intervention was evaluated by comparing macrolide usage and expenditure for the four years pre- and post-intervention., Results: Mean annual clarithromycin IV use decreased by 72% from 6.4 to 1.8 defined daily doses (DDDs) per 1,000 occupied bed days (OBDs) post-intervention, while oral azithromycin increased by 833% (4.2 to 39.2 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs). Concurrently, oral clarithromycin use decreased by 91% (32.9 to 2.9 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs), and roxithromycin by 71% (17.0 to 5.0 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs). Mean annual total macrolide use decreased by 21% (68.2 to 53.9 DDDs per 1,000 OBDs), while expenditure decreased by 69% mainly through avoided IV administration., Conclusions: A persuasive multimodel approach to support adoption of CAP guidelines produced a sustained decrease in IV clarithromycin use, which may have clinical benefits such as reduced occurrence of catheter-related complications., Competing Interests: Dr Werno reports that she is a Member of the Anti-Infective subcommittee, Pharmacology and Therapeutics Advisory Committee (PTAC), PHARMAC (www.pharmac.health.nz).

Background and Aim: There is little published research to examine the best approach to the management of Helicobacter pylori in Myanmar. This study aimed to determine the relative efficacy and tolerability of sequential eradication therapy compared to Myanmar's current recommendation of a concomitant four drug regimen., Methods: Patients were screened for H. pylori using monoclonal Stool Antigen Testing (SAT). Those testing positive were randomized 1:1 to receive receive Myanmar's first-line regimen of 14 days of concomitant rabeprazole, clarithromycin, amoxycillin and tinidazole (140 pills, cost US$23) or 10 days of sequential rabeprazole, clarithromycin, amoxycillin and tinidazole (60 pills, cost US$10). Adherence and adverse effects were recorded, and the efficacy of the regimens assessed with repeat SAT., Results: Of the 1011 patients screened for H. pylori infection, 313 (31%) tested positive. There was no statistical difference in the cure rates of the two regimens in either intention-to-treat: 128/157 (82%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 75-87%) receiving sequential therapy versus 123/156 (79%; 95% CI: 72-85%) receiving concomitant therapy (P = 0.55) or per-protocol analysis: 125/131 (95%; 95% CI: 90-98) receiving sequential therapy versus 121/130 (93%; 95% CI: 87-96) receiving concomitant therapy (P = 0.42). Side effects of therapy were reported in 54/157 (47%) patients taking sequential therapy compared with 62/156 (53%) taking concomitant therapy, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.33)., Conclusions: In this high-burden, resource-poor setting, less expensive sequential therapy was as effective and as well tolerated as the currently recommended concomitant four drug regimen for eradication of H. pylori., (© 2019 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Introduction: Helicobacter pylori infection (H pylori-I) affects more than half of the global population and consists an important burden to public health and healthcare expenditures, by contributing to many diseases' pathogenesis., Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the current nonbismuth quadruple eradication regimens in a high antibiotic resistance area, such as Greece, concerning their cost-effectiveness, especially during financial crisis period., Materials and Methods: Eight hundred and nine patients who received eradication treatment against H pylori-I were included to evaluate five different regimens, using amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and metronidazole as antibiotics and one proton-pump inhibitor, based on their current eradication rates. Regimes compared 10-day concomitant use of (a) pantoprazole or (b) esomeprazole; 10-day sequential use of (c) pantoprazole or (d) esomeprazole; and 14-day hybrid using esomeprazole. Cost-effectiveness analysis ratio (CEAR) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated taking into account all direct costs and cases who needed second-line treatment. Additionally, sensitivity analysis was performed to predict all potential combinations., Results: Ten-day concomitant regimen with esomeprazole was characterized by the lowest CEAR (179.17€) followed by the same regimen using pantoprazole (183.27€). Hybrid regimen, although equivalent in eradication rates, was found to have higher CEAR (187.42€), whereas sequential regimens were not cost-effective (CEAR: 204.12€ and 216.02€ respectively)., Discussion: This is the first study evaluating the cost-effectiveness of H pylori-I treatment regimens in a high clarithromycin-resistance (≈26.5%) European area, suggesting the 10-day concomitant regimen with generics using esomeprazole 40 mg as the most appropriate one. National and regional guidelines should include cost-effectiveness in their statements, and further studies are required to clarify the necessity of a wide "test and treat" policy for H pylori-I., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background and Aim: The Helicobacter pylori eradication rate using conventional triple therapy has decreased due to clarithromycin (CAM) resistance in H. pylori. Recently, dual priming oligonucleotide (DPO)-based multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) can be used to detect H. pylori and point mutations in the 23S ribosomal RNA gene causing CAM resistance. This study aimed to evaluate the success rate and cost-effectiveness of tailored H. pylori eradication using DPO-PCR., Methods: The H. pylori-positive patients diagnosed by a rapid urease test or DPO-PCR were enrolled from a single academic hospital. The patients with positive rapid urease test results received a CAM-based triple regimen. In the tailored therapy group that underwent DPO-PCR testing, patients with A2142G and/or A2143G point mutations were treated with a bismuth-containing quadruple regimen. The cost-effectiveness of H. pylori eradication success was evaluated according to the average cost per patient and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio., Results: A total of 243 patients were allocated to the triple therapy group and 124 patients to the tailored therapy group. The first-line eradication rate of H. pylori was significantly higher in the tailored therapy group than in the conventional triple therapy group (92.7% vs 76.5%, P < 0.001). The average costs per patient for tailored therapy were $307.37 and $299.59 for first-line and second-line treatments, respectively. Compared with triple therapy, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of tailored therapy were $3.96 and -$3.81 per patient for first-line and second-line treatments, respectively., Conclusion: In Korea, tailored H. pylori eradication using DPO-PCR may be more cost-effective than conventional triple therapy., (© 2018 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Helicobacter pylori (Hp) drug resistant rate to clarithromycin (CLA) has increased to 20% to 50%, which cause concerns regarding its effectiveness in eradicating Hp, we aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CLA-based versus furazolidone (FZD)-based quadruple therapy, and assess factors that affect anti-Hp efficacy.One hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled in this single-center, prospective, randomized, open-label study. In FZD group, 92 patients were treated with FZD plus esomeprazole, bismuth potassium citrate, and amoxicillin for 14 days. In CLA group, 93 patients were treated with the same regimen except FZD was replaced by CLA. Patients were tested 4 weeks post-treatment to confirm eradication.Of the 185 enrolled patients, 180 completed the study. On intention-to-treat analysis, Hp eradication rates in FZD and CLA groups were 90.22% and 86.02% (P = .378); in per-protocol analysis, their eradication rates were 93.26% and 87.91%, respectively (P = .220). Overall incidence of total side effects in FZD and CLA groups was 19.57% and 13.98%, and their severe side effects were 3.26% and 2.15%, respectively (P > .05). Cost-effectiveness ratios of FZD and CLA groups were 0.75 and 1.02, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of FZD group over CLA group was -3.62. Eradication failures were not associated with factors including gender, age, body mass index, smoking, alcohol consumption, educational level, and urban-rural distribution in this observation (P > .05).Despite increasing drug resistance to CLA, Hp eradication rates in FZD and CLA groups have no significant difference at present; as FZD-based quadruple therapy is more cost-effective, we recommend this regimen be a first-line choice for Hp eradication.

Background/aims: Dual priming oligonucleotide-based multiplex polymerase chain reaction (DPO-based PCR) can detect the presence of clarithromycin resistance without culture. The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of DPO-based PCR for Helicobacter pylori eradication., Methods: From 2015 to 2016, medical records of patients who received H. pylori eradication therapy were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: tailored group patients who were treated based on DPO-based PCR and empirical group patients. Eradication rate and medical cost, including diagnostic tests, eradication regimens, and 13 C-urea breath tests, were compared between the two groups. Cost for one successful eradication was calculated in each group. The expected cost of eradication for empirical treatment was investigated by varying the treatment duration and eradication rate., Results: A total of 527 patients were analyzed (tailored group 208, empirical group 319). The eradication success rate of the first-line therapy was higher in the tailored group compared to that in the empirical group (91.8% vs 72.1%, p＜0.01). The total medical cost for each group was 114.8±14.1 U.S. dollars (USD) and 85.8±24.4 USD, respectively (p＜0.01). The total medical costs for each ultimately successful eradication in the tailored group and in the empirical group were 120.0 USD and 92.4 USD, respectively. The economic modeling expected cost of a successful eradication after a 7- or 14-day empirical treatment was 93.8 to 111.4 USD and 126.3 to 149.9 USD, respectively., Conclusions: Based on economic modeling, the cost for a successful eradication using DPO-based PCR would be similar or superior to the expected cost of a successful eradication with a 14-day empirical treatment when the first-line eradication rate is ≤80%.

Background: Vonoprazan (VPZ)-based triple therapy has been reported to have greater efficacy than a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication. However, because VPZ is more expensive than PPIs such as rabeprazole (RPZ), economic evaluation is essential., Methods: We performed a retrospective study on 209 patients who underwent first-line eradication of H. pylori infection in Fuyoukai Murakami Hospital from 1 March 2015 to 31 March 2016. Patients who received VPZ, amoxicillin (AMPC) and clarithromycin (CAM) were assigned to the VPZ/AC group (n = 111) and patients who received RPZ, AMPC and CAM to the RPZ/AC group (n = 98). We compared the patients' backgrounds, including age, gender, use of high-dose CAM, past history of peptic ulcer, smoking and drug-related adverse events between the two groups. We defined cost as direct medical costs per patient and effectiveness as the first-line eradication rate in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis and analyzed the cost-effectiveness using the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)., Results: There was no significant difference in the patients' backgrounds. The ITT analysis revealed an eradication rate of 94.6% for VPZ/AC and 86.7% for RPZ/AC. VPZ/AC cost 1155.4 Japanese yen (JPY) higher than RPZ/AC (34063.4 vs. 32908.0, JPY). CER of VPZ/AC was less than that of RPZ/AC (360.1 vs. 379.4, JPY per percent) and ICER of VPZ/AC was 147.0 JPY (1.28 Euro (EUR), 1 EUR =115 JPY) per percent., Conclusions: VPZ/AC was more cost-effective than RPZ/AC as first-line therapy for H. pylori eradication.

Increasing numbers of admissions for sepsis impose a heavy burden on health care systems worldwide, while novel therapies have proven both expensive and ineffective. We explored the long-term mortality and hospitalization costs after adjunctive therapy with intravenous clarithromycin in ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Two hundred patients with sepsis and VAP were enrolled in a published randomized clinical trial; 100 were allocated to blind treatment with a placebo and another 100 to clarithromycin at 1 g daily for three consecutive days. Long-term mortality was recorded. The hospitalization cost was calculated by direct quantitation of imaging tests, medical interventions, laboratory tests, nonantibiotic drugs and antibiotics, intravenous fluids, and parenteral and enteral nutrition. Quantities were priced by the respective prices defined by the Greek government in 2002. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality; cumulative hospitalization cost was the secondary endpoint. All-cause mortality rates on day 90 were 60% in the placebo arm and 43% in the clarithromycin arm (P = 0.023); 141 patients were alive on day 28, and mortality rates between days 29 and 90 were 44.4% and 17.4%, respectively (P = 0.001). The mean cumulative costs on day 25 in the placebo group and in the clarithromycin group were €14,701.10 and €13,100.50 per patient staying alive, respectively (P = 0.048). Respective values on day 45 were €26,249.50 and €19,303.10 per patient staying alive (P = 0.011); this was associated with the savings from drugs other than antimicrobials. It is concluded that intravenous clarithromycin for three consecutive days as an adjunctive treatment in VAP and sepsis offers long-term survival benefit along with a considerable reduction in the hospitalization cost. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT00297674.)., (Copyright © 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: A previous randomized study showed that clarithromycin decreases the risk of death due to ventilator-associated pneumonia and shortens the time until infection resolution. The efficacy of clarithromycin was tested in a larger population with sepsis., Methods: Six hundred patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome due to acute pyelonephritis, acute intra-abdominal infections or primary Gram-negative bacteraemia were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, multicentre trial. Clarithromycin (1 g) was administered intravenously once daily for 4 days consecutively in 302 patients; another 298 patients were treated with placebo. Mortality was the primary outcome; resolution of infection and hospitalization costs were the secondary outcomes., Results: The groups were well matched for demographics, disease severity, microbiology and appropriateness of the administered antimicrobials. Overall 28 day mortality was 17.1% (51 deaths) in the placebo arm and 18.5% (56 deaths) in the clarithromycin arm (P = 0.671). Nineteen out of 26 placebo-treated patients with septic shock and multiple organ dysfunctions died (73.1%) compared with 15 out of 28 clarithromycin-treated patients (53.6%, P = 0.020). The median time until resolution of infection was 5 days in both arms. In the subgroup with severe sepsis/shock, this was 10 days in the placebo arm and 6 days in the clarithromycin arm (P = 0.037). The cost of hospitalization was lower after treatment with clarithromycin (P = 0.044). Serious adverse events were observed in 1.3% and 0.7% of placebo- and clarithromycin-treated patients, respectively (P = 0.502)., Conclusions: Intravenous clarithromycin did not affect overall mortality; however, administration shortened the time to resolution of infection and decreased the hospitalization costs.

Background: Several alternative treatment regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication have been proposed since the efficacy of standard triple therapy has declined over time, and sequential therapy is one of them. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze and compare the efficacy, adverse effects and cost of sequential therapy with that of standard triple therapy for H. pylori infection., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases were used to retrieve all relevant articles published in the English language over the last 5 years (January 2008-October 2012). Eligibility criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing sequential and standard triple therapies in patients with documented H. pylori infection. Eligibility and quality of the trials were assessed independently by two reviewers, and the data regarding eradication rate, adverse effects and the cost of therapy were extracted., Results: Of the 17 RCTs included in the analysis (Asia 13, Europe 3, Latin America, 1), 12 reported better eradication rates with the sequential therapy, four did not find a significant difference between the two treatment regimens, and one reported a better eradication rate with standard triple therapy. All except one RCT reported no significant difference in the incidence of adverse effects between standard triple therapy and sequential therapy. Sequential therapy was cheaper than standard triple therapy in all three RCTs where a cost analysis was performed. The limitations of the RCTs included in the systematic review were that the sequential therapy regimen and the duration of standard triple therapy were not uniform. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were performed in only three RCTs., Conclusions: While the majority of the RCTs have shown superior eradication rates with sequential therapy, the largest RCT from Latin America did not find a significant difference between the two treatment regimens. Sequential therapy has good efficacy; however, further trials other than those from Asia and Italy are required to assess its superiority over existing regimens before recommending sequential therapy as the first line of treatment for H. pylori infection.

Long-term treatment with macrolides has recently been shown to reduce COPD exacerbations in doses lower than bactericidal doses. This article aims to critically review the international literature relating to the long-term effectiveness and safety of macrolides and to estimate the budget impact of preventing exacerbations with azithromycin in Belgium. Controlled clinical studies focusing on the prevention of COPD exacerbations with long-term macrolide treatment were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, Controlled Trials Registry of the Cochrane Library, and Social Science and Citation Index. The budget impact of preventing exacerbations with azithromycin in Belgium over a one-year period was calculated as the difference between the additional expenditure of annual treatment with azithromycin and the savings in hospital expenditure arising from fewer COPD exacerbations in patients with GOLD stages II-IV. Prevalence and resource use data were derived from the literature and unit cost data from Belgian sources. The literature review suggests that long-term treatment of COPD patients with azithromycin, erythromycin or clarithromycin is effective and safe, and reduces exacerbations and related hospitalizations. However, uncertainty remains about the specific patient population that is most likely to benefit from long-term macrolide treatment, the optimal dose and duration of macrolide treatment, and the potential impact of long-term macrolide treatment on resistance. The budget impact analysis demonstrated that annual hospital savings of €950 million resulting from fewer exacerbations outweighed additional expenditure on azithromycin of €595 million, implying that the prevention of COPD exacerbations with azithromycin is a cost saving strategy in Belgium., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Resistance to clarithromycin, a component of standard triple therapy, leads to inconsistent eradication rates of Helicobacter pylori infection. Some studies have shown higher eradication rates for H. pylori using sequential regimen. This study was done to compare the eradication rates for H. pylori infection between the standard triple drug therapy and the sequential therapy., Methods: Seventy-three patients with perforated duodenal ulcer following simple closure with H. pylori infection were randomized to receive either standard triple drug therapy or the sequential therapy. Standard triple drug therapy comprised of omeprazole, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin for 10 days. Sequential therapy comprised of omeprazole and amoxicillin or the first 5 days followed by omeprazole, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin for the next 5 days. Follow-up endoscopy was done at 2 months to assess the eradication rates, compliance, and side effects with each regimen., Results: Eradication rates for standard triple therapy and sequential regimen were 81.25% and 87.09%, respectively (p = 0.732). The cost of sequential therapy was cheaper and incidence of side effects and compliance were similar in each group., Conclusion: Standard triple therapy and sequential therapy have similar efficacy for eradication of H. pylori and sequential therapy is an economical alternative to standard triple therapy.

Background and Aims: Antimicrobial drug resistance is a major cause of the failure of Helicobacter pylori eradication and is largely responsible for the decline in eradication rate. Quadruple therapy has been suggested as a first-line regimen in areas with clarithromycin resistance rate >15%. This randomised trial aimed at evaluating the efficacy of a levofloxacin-containing sequential regimen in the eradication of H pylori-infected patients in a geographical area with >15% prevalence of clarithromycin resistance versus a clarithromycin containing sequential therapy., Methods: 375 patients who were infected with H pylori and naïve to treatment were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments: (1) 5 days omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1 g twice daily followed by 5 days omeprazole 20 mg twice daily +clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily + tinidazole 500 mg twice daily; or (2) omeprazole 20 mg twice daily +amoxicillin 1 g twice daily followed by omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + levofloxacin 250 mg twice daily +tinidazole 500 mg twice daily; or (3) omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + amoxicillin 1 g twice daily followed by omeprazole 20 mg twice daily + levofloxacin 500 mg twice daily + tinidazole 500 mg twice daily. Antimicrobial resistance was assessed by the E-test. Efficacy, adverse events and costs were determined for each group., Results: Eradication rates in the intention-to-treat analyses were 80.8% (95% CI, 72.8% to 87.3%) with clarithromycin sequential therapy, 96.0% (95% CI, 90.9%to 98.7%) with levofloxacin-250 sequential therapy, and 96.8% (95% CI, 92.0% to 99.1%) with levofloxacin-500 sequential therapy. No differences in prevalence of antimicrobial resistance or incidence of adverse events were observed between groups. Levofloxacin-250 therapy was cost-saving compared with clarithromycin sequential therapy., Conclusion: In an area with >15% prevalence of clarithromycin resistant H pylori strains, a levofloxacin containing sequential therapy is more effective, equally safe and cost-saving compared to a clarithromycin containing sequential therapy.

Background: Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use is costly and about two-thirds of prescribing is long-term. Although 20-50% of patients may be infected with Helicobacter pylori, eradication is not normal clinical practice., Aim: To establish if H. pylori eradication in long-term PPI users is cost-effective., Methods: Long-term PPI-using patients (n = 183) testing positive for H. pylori were randomly assigned to true or placebo eradication therapy. Patients provided 2-year resource data, and 1-year symptom severity scores. A within-trial cost effectiveness analysis was conducted from a British health service perspective., Results: Significant reductions in resource use occurred comparing eradication with placebo. After 2 years, PPI prescriptions (full-dose equivalents) fell by 3.9 (P < 0.0001); clinician (GP) consultations by 2.4 (P = 0.0001); upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopies by 14.8% (P = 0.008); clinician GI-related home visits by 19.9% (P = 0.005) and abdominal ultrasound scans fell by 20.3% (P = 0.005). Average net savings/patient were pound93 (95% CI: 33-153) after costs of detection and eradication had been deducted. At 1 year, Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire symptoms fell by 3.1 (P = 0.005) and quality-of-life measures improved (EuroQol-5D: 0.089, P = 0.08; visual analogue scale: 5.6, P = 0.002) favouring eradication., Conclusion: Helicobacter pylori eradication in infected, long-term PPI users is an economically dominant strategy, significantly reducing overall healthcare costs and symptom severity.

Objective: This article assesses the cost-effectiveness of outpatient antimicrobial treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) taking into account resistance in Belgium., Research Design and Methods: Our decision analytic model focused on mild to moderate CAP, but did not consider severe CAP. Treatment pathways reflected empirical treatment initiated in the absence of data on CAP aetiology. First-line treatment consisted of moxifloxacin, co-amoxiclav, cefuroxime or clarithromycin. If first-line treatment was unsuccessful, patients were either hospitalised or second-line treatment with a different antimicrobial was initiated. Clinical failure rates were obtained from the published literature or expert opinion. Costs were calculated using published sources from the third-party payer perspective., Main Outcome Measures: Effectiveness measures included first-line clinical failure avoided, second-line treatment avoided, hospitalisation avoided and death avoided. Healthcare costs were included, but costs of productivity loss were not considered., Results: Costs of treating a CAP episode amounted to 144E with moxifloxacin/co-amoxiclav; 222E with co-amoxiclav/clarithromycin; 211E with cefuroxime/moxifloxacin; and 193E with clarithromycin/moxifloxacin. The rate of first-line failure was 5%, 16%, 19% and 18% for these four treatment strategies, respectively. The rate of second-line treatment amounted to 4%, 13%, 16% and 15%, respectively. The hospitalisation rate was 1%, 4%, 4% and 4%, respectively. The death rate was 0.01%, 0.04%, 0.03% and 0.03%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses supported the dominance of moxifloxacin/co-amoxiclav in nearly all scenarios., Conclusions: First-line treatment of CAP patients with moxifloxacin followed by co-amoxiclav or hospitalisation if required was more effective and less costly as compared with first-line treatment with co-amoxiclav, cefuroxime or clarithromycin.

Background: Screening for Helicobacter pylori reduces dyspepsia and dyspepsia-related costs in positive individuals., Aims: To assess effect of knowledge of H. pylori status on healthcare-seeking in negative individuals., Methods: H. pylori-negative subjects in a community screening programme were randomized to placebo triple therapy or informed of their negative H. pylori status. Dyspepsia-related resource data were extracted from primary care records at 2 years, and National Health Service reference costs were applied to calculate the total cost per subject. Proportions of individuals incurring any cost were compared using a relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Differences in costs were compared using an independent sample t-test., Results: A total of 1353 H. pylori-negative individuals were randomized to placebo whilst 1355 were informed of their infection status. In the placebo arm, 212 (16%) subsequently incurred any dyspepsia-related cost compared to 172 (13%) informed of their infection status (RR of incurring cost = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67-0.97). Those informed of their infection status incurred lower costs (mean saving per individual = pound 11.02; 95% CI: - pound 3.52 to 25.56)., Conclusions: H. pylori-negative individuals informed of infection status sought health care for dyspepsia less often than those who were unaware. Population screening may reduce dyspepsia-related costs in uninfected, as well as infected individuals.

Infection with Rhodococcus equi is an important cause of pneumonia in foals, but other organ systems may also be affected. The intracellular presence of R. equi and the formation of granulomatous and suppurative inflammatory tissue mean that prolonged treatment is needed. The pharmacological properties of the combination of erythromycin and rifampicin have improved the survival of foals infected with R. equi; however, erythromycin can cause adverse reactions in foals and mares, which has prompted the search for alternative therapies. The combination of azithromycin or clarithromycin with rifampicin seems to be a promising alternative. However these combinations are expensive and adverse effects remain to be determined, especially in the dams of treated foals. Thus correct diagnosis and appropriate use of drugs are essential for the treatment of R. equi infection in foals.

Background: Helicobacter pylori is the most important etiologic agent for development of peptic ulcer, chronic gastritis and gastric carcinomas. It is now well established that H. pylori eradication treatment is more cost-effective than acid suppressing therapies alone for the treatment of peptic ulcer disease. However, the comparative cost-effectiveness of various H. pylori eradication regimens is still not clear., Objective: This study was designed to make a pharmacoeconomic comparison of different H. pylori eradication regimens in patients with peptic ulcer disease or chronic gastritis, using real-world cost and effectiveness data., Setting: Istanbul University Hospital and Marmara University Hospital., Method: A total of 75 patients diagnosed as H. pylori (+) by endoscopy were randomized to receive one of the seven H. pylori treatment protocols. These protocols were as follows: (LAC) = 'lansoprazole 30 mg bid + amoxicillin 1 g bid + clarithromycin 500 mg bid' for 7 days and (OCM) = 'omeprazole 20 mg bid + clarithromycin 250 mg bid + metronidazole 500 mg bid'; (OAM) = 'omeprazole 40 mg qd + amoxicillin 500 mg tid + metronidazole 500 mg tid'; (MARB) = 'metronidazole 250 mg tid + amoxicillin 500 mg qid + ranitidine 300 mg hs + bismuth 300 mg qid'; (OAC) = omeprazole 20 mg bid + amoxicillin 1 g bid + clarithromycin 500 mg bid'; (OCA) = omeprazole 40 mg bid + clarithromycin 500 mg bid + amoxicillin 1 g bid'; (OAB) = 'omeprazole 20 mg bid + amoxicillin 500 mg tid + bismuth 300 mg qid' each for 14 days. Only direct costs were included in the analysis. Effectiveness was measured in terms of "successful eradication". The cost-effectiveness ratios of the regimens were calculated using these effectiveness and cost data. The perspective of the study was assumed as the Government's perspective., Main Outcome Measure: Cost-effectiveness ratios of eradication regimens., Results: MARB and OCA regimens were found to be more cost-effective than the other treatment regimens. The eradication rates and cost-effectiveness ratios calculated for these protocols were 90% (158.7 euros) for MARB and 90% (195.8 euros) for OCA regimen., Conclusion: This study confirms the importance of using local pharmacoeconomic data. Analyses such as this give decision-makers the tools to choose a better treatment option which is both highly effective yet and has a low cost.

Objective: To determine the impact of a community based Helicobacter pylori screening and eradication programme on the incidence of dyspepsia, resource use, and quality of life, including a cost consequences analysis., Design: H pylori screening programme followed by randomised placebo controlled trial of eradication., Setting: Seven general practices in southwest England., Participants: 10,537 unselected people aged 20-59 years were screened for H pylori infection (13C urea breath test); 1558 of the 1636 participants who tested positive were randomised to H pylori eradication treatment or placebo, and 1539 (99%) were followed up for two years., Intervention: Ranitidine bismuth citrate 400 mg and clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for two weeks or placebo., Main Outcome Measures: Primary care consultation rates for dyspepsia (defined as epigastric pain) two years after randomisation, with secondary outcomes of dyspepsia symptoms, resource use, NHS costs, and quality of life., Results: In the eradication group, 35% fewer participants consulted for dyspepsia over two years compared with the placebo group (55/787 v 78/771; odds ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.94; P = 0.021; number needed to treat 30) and 29% fewer participants had regular symptoms (odds ratio 0.71, 0.56 to 0.90; P = 0.05). NHS costs were 84.70 pounds sterling (74.90 pounds sterling to 93.91 pounds sterling) greater per participant in the eradication group over two years, of which 83.40 pounds sterling (146 dollars; 121 euro) was the cost of eradication treatment. No difference in quality of life existed between the two groups., Conclusions: Community screening and eradication of H pylori is feasible in the general population and led to significant reductions in the number of people who consulted for dyspepsia and had symptoms two years after treatment. These benefits have to be balanced against the costs of eradication treatment, so a targeted eradication strategy in dyspeptic patients may be preferable.

Helicobacter pylori (HP) eradication therapy is a useful treatment for idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Some investigators have also reported the effects of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) monotherapy on ITP. We performed a randomized study of HP eradication therapy and PPI monotherapy on ITP. Four of nine patients achieved complete remission (CR), two of nine achieved partial remission (PR) in HP eradication therapy, three of eight achieved CR, and two of eight achieved PR in PPI monotherapy. No significant differences were observed in the CR + PR of these patients between HP eradication therapy and PPI monotherapy. As for cost comparisons, HP eradication therapy is cheaper than PPI monotherapy, but it is less effective.

We used decision-analysis modeling to compare costs and outcomes of clarithromycin extended-release (Biaxin XL, Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, Illinois, USA) and clarithromycin immediate-release (Biaxin, Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, Illinois, USA) for outpatients with lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI). More patients achieved clinical cure with extended-release (83.9%) versus immediate-release (72.8%); fewer discontinued due to adverse events. Total costs with extended-release were $32 (16%) less; incorporating greater adherence for extended-release (once-daily) therapy resulted in greater savings. Results indicate that clarithromycin extended-release is cost-saving compared with immediate-release for LRTI.

This was an observational and economic survey performed in primary care practices throughout Spain to assess the effectiveness and direct medical costs derived from antibiotic treatment of exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (CB) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in primary care. A total of 252 physicians included 1456 valid patients, 80% were male and the mean age was 68.2 years (SD = 9.8). The antibiotic treatment administered was moxifloxacin in 575 (39.5%), amoxicillin/clavulanate in 460 (31.6%) and clarithromycin in 421 (28.9%). No significant differences were found in clinical and demographic characteristics between treatment arms. The 30-days follow-up visit was completed by 1097 (75%) patients, who were therefore valid for economic evaluation. During follow-up, 440 new medical visits were generated, 69 patients required attendance in emergency wards (6.3%) and 22 were hospitalised (2%). The overall mean cost of exacerbation was Euro 118.58 [95% confidence interval (CI) = Euro 92.2-144.9] and Euro 52.44 (44.2%) were due to therapeutical failure. The mean cost of exacerbation was Euro 111.46 (95% CI = Euro 73.4-149.5) for patients treated with moxifloxacin, Euro 109.45 (95% CI = Euro 68.2-150.7) for those treated with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and Euro 138.95 (95% CI = Euro 89.4-188.5) for patients receiving clarithromycin. In conclusion, a significant number of patients require new medical interventions after ambulatory treatment of exacerbations of CB or COPD. The mean cost of an exacerbation was Euro 118.58 and failure was responsible for 44.2% of the total cost of exacerbation.

Because most HIV-infected patients die of diseases caused by opportunistic pathogens, the prevention of these infections is an important clinical issue. Cost-containment in the healthcare system is a subject of high priority in public debate. Methods to determine cost-effectiveness of different therapeutic strategies are therefore needed to obtain valid data as the basis for decisions on cost reduction without a decrease in the quality of care. A disease state transition model based on a Markov process was developed to simulate the natural history of HIV infection and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Using this model survival time and treatment costs for every patient can be estimated and the results of alternative medications compared. We determined the cost-effectiveness (per life-year saved, LYS) of different strategies for prevention of Mycobacterium avium complex infections in AIDS patients whose treatment regimens include protease inhibitors. The cost-effectiveness ratios for treatment strategies vary from 13,510 euro to 46,152 euro per LYS without protease inhibitors and from 22,309 euro to 51,336 euro with protease inhibitors. When azithromycin, clarithromycin, and rifabutin were compared, azithromycin was the most cost-effective medication for preventing M. avium complex. The results were stable against a wide range of parameter variations concerning costs and incidence rates.

Background and Aim: One-week triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori revealed, during these last few years, a decrease in the eradication rate, so that the prolongation of its duration has been proposed. A sequential scheme recently showed very satisfactory results. We performed a prospective randomised study with the aim of either evaluating whether the triple therapy prolongation may improve its effectiveness and comparing its outcome with that of sequential regimen., Patients and Methods: Three hundred and forty-two H. pylori positive patients completed the study. They were randomised to receive one of the following treatments: (i) a 7-day triple therapy comprising of rabeprazole (20 mg, b.i.d.) plus clarithromycin (500 mg, b.i.d.) and amoxycillin (1 g, b.i.d.); (ii) a 10-day triple therapy comprising the same scheme; (iii) a 10-day sequential regimen comprising of rabeprazole (20 mg, b.i.d.) plus amoxycillin (1 g, b.i.d.) for 5 days followed by rabeprazole (20 mg, b.i.d.) plus clarithromycin (500 mg, b.i.d.) and tinidazole (500 mg, b.i.d.) for the next 5 days. Therapeutic results were expressed using both intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses with 95% confidence intervals. A model of multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed using therapeutic outcome as a dependent variable and including endoscopic finding, smoking habit, age and sex as candidates for the model., Results: Sequential regimen showed a significant gain in the eradication rate as compared to the 7-day (P < 0.0001) and the 10-day (P < 0.01) triple therapies, respectively. Overall eradication was lower in smokers than in non-smokers, but the difference remained significant only in the 7-day triple therapy (P < 0.01). Additionally, the overall eradication was higher in peptic ulcer than dyspepsia (P < 0.01), even if this difference was significant only for both triple therapies., Conclusions: Seven-day triple therapy achieves disappointing eradication rates in dyspeptics and smokers. Prolonging triple therapy to 10 days does not significantly improve the eradication rate. The novel 10-day sequential regimen is more effective and equally tolerated than the 10-day triple therapy.

Background: Adult Helicobacter pylori-positive patients by 13C-urea breath test with uninvestigated dyspepsia symptoms were randomized to 1-week eradication treatment with omeprazole, metronidazole and clarithromycin (OMC) vs. omeprazole and placebo antimicrobials (OPP) in the Canadian Adult Dyspepsia Empiric Treatment-H. pylori-positive (CADET-Hp) study., Aim: To perform an economic evaluation of this 1-year study., Methods: Following blind eradication treatment, family practitioners managed patients according to their usual practices. Health resource utilization information was collected prospectively. From the mean costs of the health resources consumed and the treatment outcomes, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and incremental net benefits of eradication treatment vs. OPP were determined., Results: Eradication therapy significantly improved dyspepsia symptoms (treatment success: OMC, 50%; OPP, 36%; P = 0.02). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of OMC vs. OPP was - 387 Canadian dollars (CAD$) per treatment success (90% CI, - CAD$1707, CAD$607), indicating a lower cost with treatment success. The incremental net benefit analysis showed that H. pylori eradication was cost-effective if the willingness-to-pay value exceeded a nominal figure of CAD$100 from a health service perspective or CAD$607 from the societal perspective., Conclusion: In uninvestigated patients presenting with dyspepsia at the primary care level, eradication of H. pylori in those who are H. pylori positive leads to a cost-effective improvement in dyspepsia symptoms compared with a strategy of not eradicating H. pylori in these patients.

Objective: To compare the clinical response to amoxicillin, cefuroxime and clarithromycin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in children and to see the cost effectiveness of each treatment., Design: Randomized clinical control trial., Place and Duration of Study: Department of Pediatrics, Khyber teaching hospital, Peshawar, from October 2001 to February 2002., Subjects and Methods: Patients between 3 to 72 months of age, admitted in the hospital with community acquired pneumonia, were randomly divided into three groups,1,2,3. They were started on amoxicillin, cefuroxime and clarithromycin respectively. The patients were assessed daily. If there was no clinical improvement at 48 hours the antibiotic was changed. ANOVA statistical test was applied to see the clinical response to the treatment in the three groups. Cost effectiveness of the treatment was compared., Results: There was no statistical difference in the clinical response at 48 hours of initiating treatment and at discharge (p > 0.01 each). The mean hospital stay in group 1 and 2 was 3.3 days and group 3 was 3.2 days respectively (p > 0.01). Ninety-seven percent patients in group 1 and 3, and 95% patients in group 2 showed clinical improvement. The cost of treatment of community acquired pneumonia for 8 days was Rs 496/-, 730/-, 1018/- for amoxicillin, clarithromycin and cefuroxime respectively., Conclusion: Amoxicillin was found the most cost effective followed by clarithromycin and cefuroxime respectively in the treatment of non-severe and severe community-acquired pneumonia.

Background: Several studies have shown that Helicobacter pylori eradication rates with standard 7-day triple therapy are unsatisfactory. A novel 10-day sequential treatment regimen recently achieved a significantly higher eradication rate. To improve the pharmacotherapeutic cost, we evaluated whether an acceptable eradication rate could be achieved in peptic ulcer patients by halving the dose of clarithromycin., Methods: In a prospective, open-label study, 152 duodenal ulcer patients with H. pylori infection, assessed by rapid urease test and histology, were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either a 10-day sequential treatment comprising rabeprazole 20 mg b.d. plus amoxicillin 1 g b.d. for the first 5 days, followed by rabeprazole 20 mg b.d., clarithromycin 500 mg b.d. and tinidazole 500 mg b.d. for the remaining 5 days (high-dose therapy), or a similar schedule with the clarithromycin doses halved to 250 mg b.d. (low-dose therapy). No further antisecretory drugs were offered. Four to six weeks after therapy, H. pylori eradication and ulcer healing rates were assessed by endoscopy., Results: Similar H. pylori eradication rates were observed following high- and low-dose regimens for both per protocol (97.3% vs. 95.9%; P = N.S.) and intention-to-treat (94.7% vs. 92.2%; P = N.S.) analyses. No major side-effects were reported. At repeat endoscopy, peptic ulcer healing was observed in 93% and 93% of patients following high- and low-dose therapy, respectively., Conclusion: The cheaper low-dose sequential regimen may be suggested for H. pylori eradication in duodenal ulcer patients, even without continued proton pump inhibitor therapy after eradication treatment.

A pharmacoeconomic analysis was carried out comparing the efficacy of two treatment options for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP): telithromycin and clarithromycin. It was a retrospective analysis using a decision tree model. The efficacy of the two treatment options was estimated from a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, in which 800 mg/day oral telithromycin for 10 days was compared to 1000 mg/day oral clarithromycin for 10 days in patients with CAP (162 and 156 respectively). The use of resources was estimated based on the clinical trial and Spanish sources, and the unit costs from a Spanish health costs database. Costs were evaluated for the acquisition of antibiotic treatments, change of antibiotic due to therapeutic failure, hospital admissions, adverse reactions to treatment, primary care visits, tests and indirect costs (working days lost). The model was validated by a panel of Spanish clinical experts. As the clinical trial was designed to show equivalence, there were no significant differences in efficacy between the treatment options (clinical cure rate 88.3% and 88.5%, respectively), and a cost minimization analysis was performed. In the base case, the average cost of the disease per patient was 308.29 euros with telithromycin and 331.5 euros with clarithromycin (a difference of 23.21 euros). The results were stable in the susceptibility analysis, with differences favorable to telithromycin ranging between 5.50 and 45.45 euros. Telithromycin results in a cost savings of up to 45.45 euros per CAP patient compared to clarithromycin.

Background & Aims: The major obstacle to 100% effective eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection is represented by antimicrobial-resistant H. pylori strains. This randomized study was designed to evaluate whether regimens based on pretreatment susceptibility testing were more effective and cost saving compared with standard nonsusceptibility testing-based therapy in the eradication of H. pylori infection., Methods: We studied 150 consecutive H. pylori-infected dyspeptic subjects. Patients were randomly assigned to omeprazole 20 mg twice daily, clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily, and metronidazole 500 mg twice daily for 7 days or to omeprazole 20 mg twice daily and 2 antimicrobials chosen based on susceptibility testing. H. pylori status was reevaluated 12 weeks after the end of treatment by the (13)C-urea breath test., Results: Susceptibility testing-based regimens led to the following results. (1) Eradication rates were 97.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.2%-99.5%) (71 of 73) and 94.6% (95% CI, 87.6%-98.3%) (71 of 75) in the per-protocol and intention-to-treat analysis, respectively. These were significantly higher (P < 0.005) than eradication rates obtained without susceptibility testing, that is, 79.4% (95% CI, 69.1%-87.6%) (58 of 73) and 77.3% (95% CI, 66.9%-85.7%) (58 of 75) in the per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses, respectively. (2) There were savings of approximately $5 U.S. per patient compared with standard triple therapy., Conclusions: Pretreatment antimicrobial susceptibility testing is more effective and cost saving and, in health systems that confirm cost advantage, microbial susceptibility testing should be routinely used for eradication of H. pylori infection.

In this open, prospective, study were enrolled 204 hospitalized elderly patients with severe (88 males, 116 females, age range 70-94). Patients were randomized to receive one of the following antibiotic treatment regimens: meropenem 500 mg i.v. t.i.d. (52); imipenem/cilastatin 500 mg i.v. t.i.d. (51), clarithromycin 500 mg + ceftriaxone 1 g i.v. b.i.d. (52), clarithromycin 500 mg + amikacin 250 mg i.v. b.i.d. (49). In 99 cases causative germs were isolated (24 meropenem, 26 imipenem, 23 clarithromycin + ceftriaxone, 26 ceftriaxone + amikacin). A satisfactory clinical, bacteriological response was achieved respectively in 86.5% 77% in meropenem; 86.3% 71% in imipenem/cilastatin; 69% 61% in ceftriaxone + clarithromycin and in 85.7% 77% in clarithromycin + amikacin. The mean total cost for each patient was $1,560; $1,620; $1,760 and $1,792 in meropenem, imipenem/cilastatin, clarithromycin + ceftriaxone and clarithromycin + amikacin respectively. This study shows that treatment with either meropenem or imipenem is as efficacious as conventional therapy in the treatment of community acquired pneumonia (CAP), and that meropenem is the most cost-effective.

The cost-effectiveness of treatment with oral gemifloxacin versus oral clarithromycin for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) was evaluated. Economic outcomes were assessed for the Gemifloxacin Long-term Outcomes in Bronchitis Exacerbations study. This prospective double-blind, controlled, health outcomes study compared health, economic, and clinical outcomes after randomized treatment with either oral gemifloxacin or oral clarithromycin for AECB. Base case analysis was performed from the third-party payer's perspective and considered the costs of respiratory tract infection-related medical care. Analysis from the societal perspective also included costs of lost productivity. Treatment effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients without recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment following resolution of the initial AECB. Data sources included the outcomes study itself and standard U.S. cost sources. Compared with clarithromycin, gemifloxacin treatment resulted in significantly more patients without AECB recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment after 26 weeks (73.8% versus 63.8%, p = 0.024). Fewer patients receiving gemifloxacin were hospitalized (5 of 214 patients versus 14 of 224 patients, p = 0.059), and they had less time off from usual activities (8.3 days versus 10.1 days). The mean direct cost per patient receiving gemifloxacin was $127 less than with clarithromycin ($247 versus $374, respectively); mean total costs (direct plus indirect) per patient were $329 less for patients receiving gemifloxacin ($1413 versus $1742). Gemifloxacin dominated clarithromycin in cost-effectiveness analysis. Bootstrap analysis indicated that the probability of gemifloxacin being both cost saving and more effective than clarithromycin is 88% from a payer's perspective and 84% from the societal perspective. Gemifloxacin was more cost-effective, improving AECB outcomes and producing substantial cost offsets compared with clarithromycin.

Background: Economic models have suggested that population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment may be a cost-effective method of reducing mortality from gastric cancer. These models are conservative as they do not consider that the programme may reduce health service peptic ulcer and other dyspepsia costs. We have evaluated the economic impact of population H. pylori screening and treatment over 2 years in a randomized controlled trial and have incorporated the results into an economic model exploring the impact of H. pylori eradication on peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer., Methods: Subjects between the ages of 40 and 49 years were randomly invited to attend their local primary care centre. H. pylori status was evaluated by (13)C-urea breath test and infected individuals were randomized to receive omeprazole, 20 mg b.d., clarithromycin, 250 mg b.d., and tinidazole, 500 mg b.d., for 7 days or identical placebos. Economic data on health service costs for dyspepsia were obtained from a primary care note review for the 2 years following randomization. These data were incorporated into a Markov model comparing population H. pylori screening and treatment with no intervention., Results: A total of 2329 of 8407 subjects were H. pylori positive: 1161 were randomized to receive eradication therapy and 1163 to receive placebo. The cost difference favoured the intervention group 2 years after randomization, but this did not reach statistical significance (11.42 ponds sterling per subject cost saving; 95% confidence interval, 30.04 ponds sterling to -7.19 pounds sterling; P=0.23). Analysis by gender suggested a statistically significant dyspepsia cost saving in men (27.17 ponds sterling per subject; 95% confidence interval, 50.01 pounds sterling to 4.32 pounds sterling; P=0.02), with no benefit in women (-4.46 per subject; 95% confidence interval, -33.85 pounds sterling to 24.93 pounds sterling). Modelling of these data suggested that population H. pylori screening and treatment for 1,000,000 45-year-olds would save over 6,000,000 pounds sterling and 1300 years of life. The programme would cost 14, 200 pounds sterling per life year saved if the health service dyspepsia cost savings were the lower limit of the 95% confidence intervals and H. pylori eradication had only a 10% efficacy in reducing mortality from distal gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease., Conclusions: Modelling suggests that population H. pylori screening and treatment are likely to be cost-effective and could be the first cost-neutral screening programme. This provides a further mandate for clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of population H. pylori screening and treatment in preventing mortality from gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease.

Background: Helicobacter pylori eradication triple therapy with a combination of lansoprazole, amoxicillin and clarithromycin was approved in Japan in September 2000., Aim: To compare the cost-effectiveness of this eradication therapy with conventional histamine-2 receptor antagonist therapy in Japan., Methods: We established two Markov models for gastric and duodenal ulcers. The model design was based on the Japanese H. pylori eradication guideline and a specialist's opinions, and the model inputs were obtained from a literature review. The models predict the direct medical costs, number of disease-free days and cost per disease-free day for 5 years., Results: In the gastric ulcer model, the expected total costs of eradication and conventional therapies per patient were yen169 719 and yen390 921, respectively; the expected numbers of disease-free days were 1454 days and 1313 days, respectively. In the duodenal ulcer model, the expected total costs were yen134 786 and yen324 689, respectively; the expected numbers of disease-free days were 1503 days and 1387 days, respectively. The sensitivity analyses showed that the results of the base case analysis were robust., Conclusions: This eradication therapy is less costly and more effective than conventional therapy for the treatment of gastric and duodenal ulcers in a Japanese medical setting.

Background: Clinical guidelines support a noninvasive Helicobacter pylori "test-and-treat" strategy for individuals with uncomplicated dyspepsia. However, consensus is lacking regarding the preferred noninvasive testing method., Objective: To use decision analytic modeling to estimate the clinical and economic outcomes associated with noninvasive tests designed to detect either H pylori antibody or active H pylori infection., Design: Decision analytic model., Patients: A simulated patient cohort with uncomplicated dyspepsia., Interventions: The simulated dyspepsia cohort underwent antibody testing or testing to detect active H pylori infection (active testing). Individuals testing positive received eradication therapy., Main Outcome Measures: Appropriate and inappropriate treatment prescribed, cost per patient treated, incremental cost per unnecessary treatment avoided., Results: Active testing led to a substantial reduction in unnecessary treatment for patients without active infection (antibody, 23.7; active, 1.4 per 100 patients) at an incremental cost of $37 per patient. The clinical advantage and cost-effectiveness of active testing was enhanced as the percentage of individuals with a positive antibody test result from past, but not current, infection increased., Conclusions: Active testing for H pylori infection significantly decreases the inappropriate use of antimicrobial therapy when compared with antibody testing. The advantages of active testing should be enhanced as the widespread use of antimicrobial agents increases the proportion of patients with antibody to H pylori, but without active infection.

Background: Triple therapy with a proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin and amoxicillin is widely used for H. pylori infection. The appropriate length of treatment remains controversial., Aim: To determine whether length of treatment has an impact on the cost-effectiveness of triple therapy., Methods: The study took the form of a cost-effectiveness analysis spanning 2 years. The perspective was societal and the setting, ambulatory care. Subjects were Helicobacter pylori-positive patients with a duodenal ulcer. The triple therapy trials spanned 7, 10 or 14 days and the main outcome measures were cost per patient and marginal cost for additional cured patient calculated for a low cost-of-care setting (Spain), for a high-cost setting (USA), and for two follow-up strategies: (i) systematic 13C-urea breath test after eradication; (ii) clinical follow-up, breath-test if symptoms recurred., Results: Base-case analysis showed that for both the 13C-UBT and the clinical follow-up branches, lowest costs were obtained with 7-day schedules both in Spain and the USA. Sensitivity analysis showed that in Spain, 10-day therapies would have to increase 7-day cure rates by 10-12% to become cost-effective. In contrast, in the USA only a 3-5% increase was needed. The corresponding figures for 14-day therapy were 25-35% and 8-11%, respectively., Conclusions: Seven-day therapies seem the most cost-effective strategy. However, in high-cost areas the differences were less evident.

Background: The most widely used treatments for ulcer healing and Helicobacter pylori eradication consist of a 1-2 week regimen of a proton pump inhibitor plus two or three antimicrobials., Aims: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, cost, and tolerance of a three-day regimen with three antibiotics vs. a 10-day treatment with a proton pump inhibitor or vs. a ranitidine bismuth citrate triple therapy., Methods: Two hundred and twenty-one patients with endoscopically-proven H. pylori-positive duodenal ulcers were recruited to the study. Recruited patients were assigned to one of the following four regimens: (I) omeprazole 40 mg o.m. plus amoxycillin 1 g b.d. and clarithromycin 500 mg b.d. for 10 days (OAC: 55 patients); (ii) omeprazole 40 mg o.m. on days 1-5, plus amoxycillin 1 g b.d., clarithromycin 500 mg b.d. and metronidazole 500 mg b.d. on days 3-5 (OACM: 56 patients); (iii) ranitidine bismuth citrate 400 mg b.d. plus amoxycillin 1 g b.d. and clarithromycin 500 mg b.d. for 10 days (RAC: 54 patients); (iv) ranitidine bismuth citrate 400 mg b.d. on days 1-5, plus amoxycillin 1 g b.d., clarithromycin 500 mg b.d. and metronidazole 500 mg b.d. on days 3-5 (RACM: 56 patients). Fisher's exact test was used to compare data regarding healing and eradication in the four groups., Results: The intention-to-treat eradication and ulcer healing rates for the RACM regimen were 95% and 98%, respectively. Statistically significant differences were observed, relating to the eradication and healing of ulcers, between RACM and either the RAC or OAC regimens., Conclusion: The three-day antibiotic therapy with amoxycillin, clarithromycin and metronidazole in addition to ranitidine bismuth citrate is a very effective anti-H. pylori regimen.

Background: To analyze cost-effectiveness of two different strategies to treat H. pylori infection in peptic ulcer in the primary care setting., Patients and Methods: Consecutive patients with endoscopic diagnosis of peptic ulcer were randomized to one of two strategies: a) treatment during 7 days with omeprazole, tetracycline, metronidazole and bismuth subcitrate ("quadruple" therapy) and if failure second-line treatment with omeprazole, amoxycillin and clarithromycin during 7 days (OCA7), and b) initial treatment with OCA7 and if failure treatment with "quadruple therapy". End point was eradication 8 weeks after last treatment dose. Direct and indirect costs were estimated (euros, 1997) and a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision-tree model was undertaken after real clinical data. 95% confidence intervals are given., Results: After screening 255 patients, 97 were finally included. 48 patients were given strategy a and 49 strategy b. Eradication was obtained (intention-to-treat) in 72.9% (CI 95%: 58.2-84.7) in group a versus 91.8% (CI 95%: 80.4-97.7) (p < 0.05) in group b. Mean cost per case treated was lower in group a (237 versus 268 euros) but cost per case eradicated was lower in group b (320 versus 296 euros). The cost was primarily determined by efficacy., Conclusions: Treatment with OCA7 followed by rescue with "quadruple" therapy if failure is more efficient in our area that the inverse strategy. Efficiency is mostly determined by efficacy.

We examined the cost-effectiveness of sparfloxacin compared with other selected oral antimicrobials in outpatient treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) using clinical pathway-based decision analysis. Cost estimates were obtained from medical claims databases and Medicare reimbursement schedules. Probability estimates were derived from published clinical trials, the medical literature, and clinical expert opinion. Overall adjusted efficacy rates were 89% for sparfloxacin, 79.4% for azithromycin, 77.8% for clarithromycin, 73% for cefaclor, 70.8% for amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, and 69% for erythromycin. The expected total cost/CAP episode of treatment with sparfloxacin was $216.07 compared with $258.97, $297.08, $345.75, $389.80, and $395.93 for azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, and cefaclor, respectively. Therapy with sparfloxacin for managing CAP is cost effective-relative to other commonly prescribed antibiotics, resulting in net cost savings.

Objective: To identify health outcomes and costs/savings of a Helicobacter pylori test-and-treat strategy in patients using acid suppressants chronically., Design: Prospective intervention study. Patients were tested for H. pylori infection and treated with 14 days of ranitidine bismuth citrate (RBC) 400 mg (b.i.d.) and clarithromycin 500 mg if infected. Cure was determined after six months., Setting: General practice., Participants: Patients using acid suppressants chronically were identified by a computer search; 184 patients gave written consent and were included., Main Outcome Measures: Serology, symptom questionnaire, medication history, quality of life determination, costs/savings., Results: Out of 184 patients, 85 (46%) had positive serology. A cure rate of 61/80 (76%) was achieved. The intervention group showed significant symptom relief. Benefits were evident in patients with ulcer disease but also in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia. Quality of life improved for cured patients in the intervention group. No improvements for dyspeptic symptoms or quality of life occurred in the H. pylori-negative group. After six months, significant savings for medication use had occurred in treated patients diagnosed as ulcer disease or non-ulcer dyspepsia. Savings on drug use and doctor visits equalize with costs for tests and antibiotics after nine months. Although less, costs for drugs also decreased significantly in the H. pylori-negative group. Therefore, for the study population, costs and savings are even after 6.5 months., Conclusions: A test-and-treat strategy for H. pylori, systematically applied at the population level in patients using acid suppressants chronically, results in significant health benefits and economic savings within 1 year of follow-up.

Background: When treating oral infections, clinicians have used the macrolide antibiotic erythromycin as an alternative antibiotic for patients who have documented allergic reactions to penicillins. In this article, the author reports on his assessment of the pharmacology of erythromycin and the newer macrolide antibiotics, as well as of their indications for the prevention of bacterial endocarditis and their possible use for oral-dental infections., Types of Studies Reviewed: The author reviewed the current clinical pharmacology literature with specific emphasis on reports indicating these antibiotics' efficacy in treating oral-dental infections., Results: Azithromycin, clarithromycin and dirithromycin are erythromycin analogues that are currently marketed in the United States. All three have the therapeutic advantages over erythromycin of longer durations of action, enhanced acid stabilities and improved tissue distributions. A lower incidence of gastrointestinal distress and abdominal cramping is reported for all three of these newer agents than for erythromycin. Azithromycin and dirithromycin do not appear to compete for the same hepatic drug-metabolizing enzymes as erythromycin and therefore are not associated with the same drug interactions., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: The newer macrolide antibiotics offer the advantage of fewer adverse gastrointestinal effects than erythromycin and dosing regimens of only once or twice a day. Yet, the extremely high price of the newer macrolides compared with that of erythromycin limits their routine use.

Objective: To test whether eradication of Helicobacter pylori saves costs in the treatment of duodenal ulcer disease, compared with conventional antisecretory therapy., Study Design: A prospective, double-blind clinical trial was conducted at 132 sites in the United States., Patients and Methods: Adult patients with active duodenal ulcer and confirmed H pylori infection were randomized to receive treatment with clarithromycin plus omeprazole, omeprazole alone, or ranitidine alone. Utilization of ulcer-related healthcare resources was documented during 1 year following therapy. Costs were calculated by multiplying the number of health resources utilized by the cost of each resource. Resource costs were obtained from a database containing actual average costs spent by managed care organizations on outpatient and inpatient treatment., Results: Of the 819 patients enrolled, 727 completed the study: 243 received clarithromycin plus omeprazole, 248 omeprazole alone, and 236 ranitidine alone. Ulcer-related health resource utilization and total ulcer-related healthcare costs were decreased after treatment with clarithromycin plus omeprazole, compared to treatment with omeprazole or ranitidine alone. In multivariate linear regression analyses, type of treatment was found to be a significant predictor of total costs. Specific costs associated with endoscopic examinations, clinic visits, and medications were also significantly reduced by treatment with clarithromycin plus omeprazole as compared to other treatment forms., Conclusions: In a managed care environment, therapy with clarithromycin and omeprazole to eradicate H pylori in patients with duodenal ulcer disease would result in significant cost savings secondary to a reduction in the utilization of healthcare resources.

Background: We hypothesized that treatment of duodenal ulcer disease with antibiotic therapy directed toward Helicobacter pylori infection is more cost-effective than therapy with antisecretory agents., Methods: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical trial of adult patients with active duodenal ulcer and H. pylori infection was conducted. Patients were randomized to receive 500 mg of clarithromycin 3 times a day plus 40 mg of omeprazole daily for 14 days followed by 20 mg of omeprazole daily for an additional 14 days (group 1), 20 mg of omeprazole daily for 28 days (group 2), or 150 mg of ranitidine hydrochloride twice a day for 28 days (group 3). The use of ulcer-related health care resources was documented during monthly interviews for 1 year after the initial therapy. Clinical success was evaluated 4 to 6 weeks and 1 year after the end of therapy., Results: Of the 819 patients enrolled, 727 completed the study. Group 1 included 243 patients; group 2, 248 patients; and group 3, 236 patients. Patients in group 1 used fewer ulcer-related health care resources during the 1 year after therapy compared with groups 2 and 3 (comparisons are given as group 1 vs group 2 and group 1 vs group 3, respectively): the number of endoscopies performed, 28 vs 76 (P<.001) and vs 71 (P<.001); patients receiving drugs to treat an ulcer, 118 vs 180 (P<.001) and vs 168 (P<.001); clinic visits, 83 vs 135 (P=.05) and vs 161 (P<.001); hospitalizations, 0 vs 5 (P=.045) and vs 6 (P=.02); and length of hospital stay, 0 vs 24 days (P=.04) and vs 37 (P=.04). When ulcer-related costs were defined as the outcome variable in a multivariate linear regression analysis, therapy was determined to have a significant influence on costs (group 1 vs group 2, P<.001; group 1 vs group 3, P=.008). Clinical success rates at the end of the study and cure of H. pylori infection were significantly greater in group 1 compared with groups 2 and 3 (P<.001). Therapy with clarithromycin plus omeprazole provided savings of $1.94 and $2.96 (compared with therapy with omeprazole and with ranitidine hydrochloride, respectively) per dollar spent within the first year after therapy. This incremental cost-benefit translates to savings of $547 or $835 per patient in group 1 (compared with patients in group 2 or group 3, respectively) during the first year after therapy., Conclusions: Combination therapy with clarithromycin and omeprazole resulted in significantly fewer uses of ulcer-related health care resources than conventional antisecretory therapy during a 1-year follow-up and significant savings in associated costs during the same period. Patients who received clarithromycin plus omeprazole also showed a significantly improved clinical outcome compared with patients who received only omeprazole or ranitidine.

Background: Traditionally, patients presenting with uncomplicated dyspepsia have been managed using empiric antisecretory therapy, followed by endoscopy in the event of persistent symptoms or complication. Since Helicobacter pylori is now accepted as an important and potentially reversible cause of ulcer disease, it is important to reevaluate the management of dyspepsia. The goal of this study is to evaluate seven outpatient strategies for the management of dyspeptic patients using a cost-utility analysis., Methods: The study design was that of a cost-utility analysis. The model assumes that an adult patient with signs of dyspepsia but no signs of complication presents to the outpatient office of a primary care physician. Seven strategies are modeled: empiric antisecretory therapy; empiric H pylori eradication using oral omeprazole (20 mg [corrected] twice daily), clarithromycin (500 mg twice daily), and amoxicillin (1000 mg twice daily); use of either upper endoscopy, an upper gastrointestinal barium study (an upper GI), or the serum titer for H pylori as a diagnostic test to identify patients for H pylori eradication; or use of an initial diagnostic test followed by the serum titer for H pylori. The primary outcome was the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for each strategy for a 1-year period from presentation; secondary outcomes included the probability of symptomatic ulcer recurrence, cost per ulcer cure, and mortality., Results: Three strategies were similarly cost-effective: empiric H pylori eradication ($1198 per QALY), use of a serum H pylori titer as an initial diagnostic test ($1214 per QALY), and empiric antisecretory therapy ($1288 per QALY). Empiric antisecretory therapy, however, was associated with significantly more symptomatic ulcer recurrences and deaths than any other strategy., Conclusions: This cost-utility analysis suggests that two strategies are reasonable for patients presenting with dyspepsia: (1) empiric H pylori eradication and (2) use of a serum H pylori titer to identify patients who might benefit from H pylori eradication. The latter strategy may be preferable because it is less likely to lead to antibiotic resistance. Strategies utilizing an upper GI or upper endoscopy (either with or without serum H pylori titer) or empiric antisecretory therapy do not improve outcomes and are associated with greater cost, morbidity, and/or mortality.