Display options
Cite
Grau S, Azanza JR, Ruiz I, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of combination antifungal therapy with voriconazole and anidulafungin versus voriconazole monotherapy for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis in Spain. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2016;9:39-47doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S122177.
Grau, S., Azanza, J. R., Ruiz, I., Vallejo, C., Mensa, J., Maertens, J., Heinz, W. J., Barrueta, J. A., Peral, C., Mesa, F. J., Barrado, M., Charbonneau, C., Rubio-Rodríguez, D., & Rubio-Terrés, C. (2017). Cost-effectiveness analysis of combination antifungal therapy with voriconazole and anidulafungin versus voriconazole monotherapy for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis in Spain. ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 939-47. https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S122177
Grau, Santiago, et al. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of combination antifungal therapy with voriconazole and anidulafungin versus voriconazole monotherapy for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis in Spain." ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR vol. 9 (2017): 39-47. doi: https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S122177
Grau S, Azanza JR, Ruiz I, Vallejo C, Mensa J, Maertens J, Heinz WJ, Barrueta JA, Peral C, Mesa FJ, Barrado M, Charbonneau C, Rubio-Rodríguez D, Rubio-Terrés C. Cost-effectiveness analysis of combination antifungal therapy with voriconazole and anidulafungin versus voriconazole monotherapy for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis in Spain. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2016 Dec 30;9:39-47. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S122177. eCollection 2017. PMID: 28115858; PMCID: PMC5221484.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2016 Dec 30;9:39-47. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S122177. eCollection 2017.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of combination antifungal therapy with voriconazole and anidulafungin versus voriconazole monotherapy for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis in Spain.

ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR

Santiago Grau, Jose Ramon Azanza, Isabel Ruiz, Carlos Vallejo, Josep Mensa, Johan Maertens, Werner J Heinz, Jon Andoni Barrueta, Carmen Peral, Francisco Jesús Mesa, Miguel Barrado, Claudie Charbonneau, Darío Rubio-Rodríguez, Carlos Rubio-Terrés

Affiliations

  1. Pharmacy Department, Hospital del Mar, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona.
  2. Clinical Pharmacology Department, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona.
  3. Infectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona.
  4. Hematology Department, Hospital Universitario Donostia, San Sebastián.
  5. Infectious Diseases Department, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
  6. Hematology Department, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium.
  7. Hematology/Oncology Department, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II, Universitätsklinikum, Würzburg, Germany.
  8. Medical Department.
  9. Economics and Outcomes Research Department, Pfizer S.L.U, Alcobendas.
  10. Clinical Trials Department, Trial Form Support, Madrid, Spain.
  11. Pharmacoeconomics Department, Pfizer International Operations, Paris, France.
  12. Pharmacoeconomics Department, Health Value, Madrid, Spain.

PMID: 28115858 PMCID: PMC5221484 DOI: 10.2147/CEOR.S122177

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: According to a recent randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing the combination of voriconazole and anidulafungin (VOR+ANI) with VOR monotherapy for invasive aspergillosis (IA) in patients with hematologic disease or with hematopoietic stem cell transplant, mortality was lower after 6 weeks with VOR+ANI than with VOR monotherapy in a post hoc analysis of patients with galactomannan-based IA. The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of VOR+ANI with VOR, from the perspective of hospitals in the Spanish National Health System.

METHODS: An economic model with deterministic and probabilistic analyses was used to determine costs per life-year gained (LYG) for VOR+ANI versus VOR in patients with galactomannan-based IA. Mortality, adverse event rates, and life expectancy were obtained from clinical trial data. The costs (in 2015 euros [€]) of the drugs and the adverse event-related costs were obtained from Spanish sources. A Tornado plot and a Monte Carlo simulation (1,000 iterations) were used to assess uncertainty of all model variables.

RESULTS: According to the deterministic analysis, for each patient treated with VOR+ANI compared with VOR monotherapy, there would be a total of 0.348 LYG (2.529 vs 2.181 years, respectively) at an incremental cost of €5,493 (€17,902 vs €12,409, respectively). Consequently, the additional cost per LYG with VOR+ANI compared with VOR would be €15,785. Deterministic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. In the probabilistic analysis, the cost per LYG with VOR+ANI was €15,774 (95% confidence interval: €15,763-16,692). The probability of VOR+ANI being cost-effective compared with VOR was estimated at 82.5% and 91.9%, based on local cost-effectiveness thresholds of €30,000 and €45,000, respectively.

CONCLUSION: According to the present economic study, combination therapy with VOR+ANI is cost-effective as primary therapy of IA in galactomannan-positive patients in Spain who have hematologic disease or hematopoietic stem cell transplant, compared with VOR monotherapy.

Keywords: anidulafungin; cost-effectiveness; galactomannan; invasive aspergillosis; voriconazole

Conflict of interest statement

JAB, CP, and FJM are employees of Pfizer S.L.U. (Spain). WJH has received research grants from MSD Sharp & Dohme/Merck and Pfizer; served on speaker bureaus for Alexion, Astellas, Basilea, Bristol-Mye

References

  1. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007 Aug;60(2):385-93 - PubMed
  2. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Oct;57(10):4664-72 - PubMed
  3. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005 Oct;21(10):1535-46 - PubMed
  4. Br J Cancer. 2003 Sep 15;89(6):1002-7 - PubMed
  5. Clin Transl Oncol. 2011 Jul;13(7):460-71 - PubMed
  6. Farm Hosp. 2005 Jan-Feb;29(1):5-10 - PubMed
  7. Med Clin (Barc). 2004 May 8;122(17):668-74 - PubMed
  8. Rev Iberoam Micol. 2003 Sep;20(3):116-8 - PubMed
  9. PLoS One. 2015 Nov 10;10(11):e0140930 - PubMed
  10. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2007 Feb;25(2):98-107 - PubMed
  11. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2009;1:35-43 - PubMed
  12. Cancer. 2010 Nov 15;116(22):5290-6 - PubMed
  13. Haematologica. 2006 Aug;91(8):1068-75 - PubMed
  14. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2014 Sep 24;15:52 - PubMed
  15. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015 Feb;21(2):183-9 - PubMed
  16. Clin Infect Dis. 2007 Feb 15;44(4):531-40 - PubMed
  17. Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Nov 15;59(10):1437-45 - PubMed
  18. Gac Sanit. 2002 Jul-Aug;16(4):334-43 - PubMed
  19. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013 Jun;13(3):223-4 - PubMed
  20. Europace. 2011 Jan;13(1):23-30 - PubMed
  21. Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2013 Jan-Feb;87(1):25-33 - PubMed
  22. Value Health. 2006 Jan-Feb;9(1):12-23 - PubMed
  23. Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jan 20;162(2):81-9 - PubMed

Publication Types