Affordable Access

deepdyve-link
Publisher Website

The cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole compared to the standard of care in the treatment of patients with invasive fungal infection prior to differential pathogen diagnosis in the United Kingdom.

Authors
  • Floros, Lefteris1
  • Pagliuca, Antonio2
  • Taie, Amer Al3
  • Weidlich, Diana1
  • Rita Capparella, Maria4
  • Georgallis, Mihalina1
  • Sung, Anita Hor-Yun5
  • 1 Covance Market Access, London, United Kingdom. , (United Kingdom)
  • 2 King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom. , (United Kingdom)
  • 3 Pfizer Ltd, Tadworth, UK.
  • 4 Pfizer PIO, Paris, France. , (France)
  • 5 Pfizer Inc, New York, NY.
Type
Published Article
Journal
Journal of medical economics
Publication Date
Jan 01, 2020
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
86–97
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1638789
PMID: 31262225
Source
Medline
Keywords
Language
English
License
Unknown

Abstract

Aims: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole compared with the standard of care, voriconazole, for the treatment of patients with invasive fungal infection disease when differential diagnosis of the causative pathogen has not yet been achieved at treatment initiation.Materials and methods: The economic model was developed from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) and used a decision-tree approach to reflect real-world treatment of patients with invasive fungal infection (IFI) prior to differential pathogen diagnosis. It was assumed that 7.8% of patients with IFI prior to differential pathogen diagnosis at treatment initiation actually had mucormycosis, and confirmation of pathogen identification was achieved for 50% of all patients during treatment. To extrapolate to a lifetime horizon, the model considered expected survival based on the patients' underlying condition. The model estimated the incremental costs (costs of drugs, laboratory analysis, hospitalization, and management of adverse events) and clinical outcomes (life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)) of first-line treatment with isavuconazole compared with voriconazole. The robustness of the results was assessed by conducting deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Results: Isavuconazole delivered 0.48 more LYs and 0.39 more QALYs per patient at an incremental cost of £3,228, compared with voriconazole in the treatment of patients with IFI prior to differential pathogen diagnosis. This equates to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £8,242 per additional QALY gained and £6,759 per LY gained. These results were driven by a lack of efficacy of voriconazole in mucormycosis. Results were most sensitive to the mortality of IA patients and treatment durations.Conclusions: At a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of £30,000 per additional QALY, the use of isavuconazole for the treatment of patients with IFI prior to differential pathogen diagnosis in the UK can be considered a cost-effective allocation of healthcare resources compared with voriconazole.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times