Cost-effectiveness analysis of sodium zirconium cyclosilicate for hyperkalemia among patients with chronic kidney disease or heart failure in Kuwait.

INTRODUCTION: Our model was conducted from Kuwaiti payer's perspective to provide evidence on the cost-effectiveness of Sodium zirconium cyclosilicate (SZC) versus patiromer to correct and maintain serum potassium (K+) in combination with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis) with different dose titration in patients with chronic kidney disease/heart failure (CKD/HF) with/without renal replacement therapy (RRT). METHODOLOGY: The model was developed as a patient-level, fixed-time increment stochastic simulation to simulate the complexity of disease, including multiple coexisting and competing conditional risks. This model was established to compare SZC versus patiromer as a treatment for hyperkalemia (HK) among adult populations with underlying conditions of advanced CKD stages 3a-5 or HF to correct and maintain serum K + over a lifetime horizon. The clinical outcomes of SZC and patiromer were demonstrated through arm-specific K + trajectories extracted from the HARMONIZE trial and OPAL-HK trial, respectively. The utility data was captured from different studies. Direct medical cost was captured from local data from Kuwaiti hospitals. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the uncertainty in the model. RESULTS: Within different scenarios of CKD/HF, SZC was a cost-saving option, with/without RRT, whether one-off administration or repeated administration, except for one-off treatment administration among the HF cohort, which generated an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of KWD 331/quality adjusted life year (QALY). The incremental QALY of SZC ranged from 0.007 to 0.202. In addition, the savings observed with SZC fall within a range of KWD -60 to KWD -1,235 at serum K+ ≥ 5.1 mmol/L. CONCLUSION: The evidence generated by our model recommends the inclusion of SZC as a treatment option to correct HK and maintain normal serum K + level for CKD/HF patients within the Kuwaiti healthcare system. The costs saved from reducing frequent HK episodes, RAASis discontinuation/down titration, major cardiovascular events, and hospitalization offset the drug acquisition cost of SZC.

Response to and outcomes of the Pfizer BNT162B2 vaccine in hemodialysis patients-A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 infection is associated with high mortality among hemodialysis patients. Standard vaccine response is generally lower among these patients. The adequate antibody titer response and the outcome of COVID-19 vaccine responders versus non-responders are unknown. METHODS: Hemodialysis patients on maintenance hemodialysis who have received two doses of Pfizer BNT162B2 vaccine were studied. Antibody response was tested after 14 days of the second dose. LIAISON SARS-CoV2 S1/S2 IgG test by DiaSorin (Italy) was used to assess antibody response. Patients were followed between 3 and 7 months after vaccination for COVID-19 infection, hospitalization and death related to COVID-19. FINDINGS: A total of 138 patients received two doses of Pfizer BNT162B2 vaccine. One hundred and twenty-seven patients had adequate response to the vaccine with IgG level ≥ 15 AU/ml versus 11 patients had poor response with IgG level ≤ 15 AU/ml. The response was 92% (127/138). Patient with history of prior COVID-19 infection had higher antibody titer mean of 339 ± 113 versus 157 ± 140 for patient with no prior history of COVID-19. Seven patients in both groups had COVID-19 infection post vaccine. Among the responders, five patients had COIVD-19 infection and two were hospitalized. These two patients had lower antibody titer of 23.9 and 75.2 AU/ml. In comparison, three patients who were not hospitalized had higher antibody titer 96.3, 118, and 319 AU/ml, respectively. In the non-responders one patient was hospitalized and one death occurred with rate of infection of 18%. DISCUSSION: Seropositive patients with low antibody titer might be associated with worse outcome among responders. The ideal antibody titer level among dialysis patient is not known. Also, prior COVID-19 infection is associated with higher response to vaccine with higher antibody titer. All non-responders did not have prior COVID-19 infection. More research is required to further evaluated protective antibody titer.

Drug-Immune Thrombocytopenia with Thrombosis versus Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia: A Critical Clinical Controversy.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a type of drug-induced immune thrombocytopenia (DITP). DITP is a rare and challenging clinical issue, especially when it is associated with thrombosis. A 62-year-old woman was admitted to our institution with end-stage renal failure. She received heparin for hemodialysis. Six days later, she became febrile and was treated with vancomycin and amikacin antibiotics. Two days after starting the vancomycin, she developed severe thrombocytopenia with extensive gangrenous deep vein thrombosis in her right leg, which required a below-the-knee amputation. The HIT test yielded positive results when heparin was already stopped, but her platelet count did not regenerate even after 3 months of heparin-free treatment. Courses of vancomycin treatment were given during several febrile episodes over the long period of severe thrombocytopenia. The patient was given both anti-immune thrombocytopenia and anticoagulant treatments because of both severe persistent thrombocytopenia and recurrent thrombotic episodes. The patient died as a result of severe thrombocytopenia, recurrent infection, and blood loss from the amputation site. Vancomycin is known to cause DITP, thrombosis, and immune complexes. DITP is a bleeding disorder, whereas HIT is a controversial thrombotic disorder. HIT tests can be influenced by cross-reacting antibodies and many other factors. Thus, there is no single method that can be considered 100% effective in confirming the HIT diagnosis. Anticoagulants must be used with great caution in patients with suspected DITP. Treatment of HIT-positive cases requires both clinical correlation and experience rather than reliance on HIT tests alone.