Use of Hy's law and a new composite algorithm to predict acute liver failure in patients with drug-induced liver injury.

BACKGROUND & AIMS Hy's Law, which states that hepatocellular drug-induced liver injury (DILI) with jaundice indicates a serious reaction, is used widely to determine risk for acute liver failure (ALF). We aimed to optimize the definition of Hy's Law and to develop a model for predicting ALF in patients with DILI. METHODS We collected data from 771 patients with DILI (805 episodes) from the Spanish DILI registry, from April 1994 through August 2012. We analyzed data collected at DILI recognition and at the time of peak levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and total bilirubin (TBL). RESULTS Of the 771 patients with DILI, 32 developed ALF. Hepatocellular injury, female sex, high levels of TBL, and a high ratio of aspartate aminotransferase (AST):ALT were independent risk factors for ALF. We compared 3 ways to use Hy's Law to predict which patients would develop ALF; all included TBL greater than 2-fold the upper limit of normal (×ULN) and either ALT level greater than 3 × ULN, a ratio (R) value (ALT × ULN/alkaline phosphatase × ULN) of 5 or greater, or a new ratio (nR) value (ALT or AST, whichever produced the highest ×ULN/ alkaline phosphatase × ULN value) of 5 or greater. At recognition of DILI, the R- and nR-based models identified patients who developed ALF with 67% and 63% specificity, respectively, whereas use of only ALT level identified them with 44% specificity. However, the level of ALT and the nR model each identified patients who developed ALF with 90% sensitivity, whereas the R criteria identified them with 83% sensitivity. An equal number of patients who did and did not develop ALF had alkaline phosphatase levels greater than 2 × ULN. An algorithm based on AST level greater than 17.3 × ULN, TBL greater than 6.6 × ULN, and AST:ALT greater than 1.5 identified patients who developed ALF with 82% specificity and 80% sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS When applied at DILI recognition, the nR criteria for Hy's Law provides the best balance of sensitivity and specificity whereas our new composite algorithm provides additional specificity in predicting the ultimate development of ALF.

Daptomycin plus fosfomycin versus daptomycin monotherapy in treating MRSA: protocol of a multicentre, randomised, phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION Despite the availability of new antibiotics such as daptomycin, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia continues to be associated with high clinical failure rates. Combination therapy has been proposed as an alternative to improve outcomes but there is a lack of clinical studies. The study aims to demonstrate that combination of daptomycin plus fosfomycin achieves higher clinical success rates in the treatment of MRSA bacteraemia than daptomycin alone. METHODS AND ANALYSIS A multicentre open-label, randomised phase III study. Adult patients hospitalised with MRSA bacteraemia will be randomly assigned (1:1) to group 1: daptomycin 10 mg/kg/24 h intravenous; or group 2: daptomycin 10 mg/kg/24 h intravenous plus fosfomycin 2 gr/6 g intravenous. The main outcome will be treatment response at week 6 after stopping therapy (test-of-cure (TOC) visit). This is a composite variable with two values: Treatment success: resolution of clinical signs and symptoms (clinical success) and negative blood cultures (microbiological success) at the TOC visit. Treatment failure: if any of the following conditions apply: (1) lack of clinical improvement at 72 h or more after starting therapy; (2) persistent bacteraemia (positive blood cultures on day 7); (3) therapy is discontinued early due to adverse effects or for some other reason based on clinical judgement; (4) relapse of MRSA bacteraemia before the TOC visit; (5) death for any reason before the TOC visit. Assuming a 60% cure rate with daptomycin and a 20% difference in cure rates between the two groups, 103 patients will be needed for each group (α:0.05, ß: 0.2). Statistical analysis will be based on intention to treat, as well as per protocol and safety analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The protocol was approved by the Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (AEMPS). The sponsor commits itself to publishing the data in first quartile peer-review journals within 12 months of the completion of the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01898338.