Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Posaconazole versus fluconazole or itraconazole for prevention of invasive fungal infections in patients undergoing intensive cytotoxic therapy for acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplasia: a cost effectiveness analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Invasive fungal infections (IFI) remain a clinical concern in hematological patients with prolonged neutropenia because they are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. In a recent randomized trial, prophylaxis with posaconazole was associated with fewer IFI and related deaths relative to a fluconazole or itraconazole (Flu/Itra) control group (p < 0.001). In the current study, a cost effectiveness analysis was conducted to estimate the economic value of posaconazole as an alternative to Flu/Itra when used to prevent IFI in this patient population.

Methods

A decision analysis model was developed using clinical and economic data from randomized comparative trials, the economic literature, and from expert opinion. The data were then used to estimate the incremental cost per life year saved with oral posaconazole prophylaxis relative to Flu/Itra from the Canadian provincial health care system perspective. The base case results were then tested with a sensitivity analysis which evaluated extremes in the incidence of IFI as well as variations in their cost of management.

Results

Prophylaxis with posaconazole provides increased efficacy and an overall cost savings of approximately $Can4,259 per patient. Despite variations in the base case parameters, the sensitivity analysis suggested stability in the primary findings. Posaconazole was associated with an overall cost savings (range = $Can1,765 to $Can4,505) in all of the scenarios evaluated. Optimal cost effectiveness was obtained because the drug was able to avoid the more resource intensive Aspergillus infections.

Conclusions

Prophylaxis with posaconazole in cancer patients with prolonged neutropenia is not only cost effective but also cost saving. The economic benefits were due to the drug’s ability to reduce the incidence of high cost fungal infections, particularly Aspergillus species.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bow EJ (2008) Considerations in the approach to invasive fungal infection in patients with haematological malignancies. Br J Haematol 140:133–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bow EJ, Wingard JR, Bowden RA (2003) Infectious complications in patients receiving cytotoxic therapy for acute leukemia: history, background and approaches to managment. Management of infection in oncology patients. Martin Dunitz, London, pp 71–104

    Google Scholar 

  3. Nucci M, Anaissie E (2001) Revisiting the source of candidemia: skin or gut? Clin Infect Dis 33:1959–1967

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Blijlevens NM, Donnelly JP, De Pauw BE (2002) Impaired gut function as risk factor for invasive candidiasis in neutropenic patients. Br J Haematol 117:259–264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bow EJ, Meddings JB (2006) Intestinal mucosal dysfunction and infection during remission-induction therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia. Leukemia 20:2087–2092

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gerson SL, Talbot GH, Hurwitz S et al (1984) Prolonged granulocytopenia: the major risk factor for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with acute leukemia. Ann Intern Med 100:345–351

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Burwen DR, Lasker BA et al (2001) Invasive aspergillosis outbreak on a hematology–oncology ward. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 22:45–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Herbrecht R, Natarajan-Amé S, Letscher-Bru V, Canuet M (2004) Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 25:191–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bow EJ (2009) Neutropenic fever syndromes in patients undergoing cytotoxic therapy for acute leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes. Semin Hematol 46:259–268

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bow EJ, Laverdiere M, Lussier N et al (2002) Antifungal prophylaxis for severely neutropenic chemotherapy recipients: a meta analysis of randomized-controlled clinical trials. Cancer 94:3230–3246

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Robenshtok E, Gafter-Gvili A, Goldberg E et al (2000) Antifungal prophylaxis in cancer patients after chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 25:5471–5489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nucci M, Biasoli I, Akiti T, et al. (2000) A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of itraconazole capsules as antifungal prophylaxis for neutropenic patients. Clin Infect Dis 30:300–305.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cornely OA, Maertens J, Winston DJ et al (2007) Posaconazole vs. fluconazole or itraconazole prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia. N Engl J Med 356:348–359

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Morrissey CO, Bardy PG, Slavin MA et al (2008) Diagnostic and therapeutic approach to persistent or recurrent fevers of unknown origin in adult stem cell transplantation and haematological malignancy. Intern Med J 38:477–95

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Martino R, Viscoli C (2006) Empirical antifungal therapy in patients with neutropenia and persistent or recurrent fever of unknown origin. Br J Haematol 132:138–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. van Burik JA, Ratanatharathorn V, Stepan DE et al (2004) Micafungin versus fluconazole for prophylaxis against invasive fungal infections during neutropenia in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Clin Infect Dis 39:1407–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wilson LS, Reyes CM, Stolpman M et al (2002) The direct cost and incidence of systemic fungal infections. Value Health 5:26–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. O’Sullivan AK, Pandya A, Papadopoulos G et al (2009) Cost effectiveness of posaconazole versus fluconazole or intraconazole in the presention of invasive fungal infections among neutropenic patients in the United States. Value Health 12:666–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hillner BE, Smith TJ (2009) Efficacy does not necessarily translate to cost effectiveness. A case study in the challenges associated with 21st century cancer drug pricing. J Clin Oncol 27:2111–3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fojo T, Grandy C (2009) How much is a life worth: cetuximab, non small cell lung cancer, and the $440 billion question. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:1044–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Walsh TJ, Anaissie EJ, Denning DW et al (2008) Treatment of aspergillosis: clinical practice guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 46:327–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was funded by Merck Canada Inc.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada

    George Dranitsaris & Haytham Khoury

  2. Health Economics and Biostatistics, 283 Danforth Avenue, Suite 448, Toronto, ON, M4K 1N1, Canada

    George Dranitsaris

Authors
  1. George Dranitsaris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haytham Khoury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George Dranitsaris.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dranitsaris, G., Khoury, H. Posaconazole versus fluconazole or itraconazole for prevention of invasive fungal infections in patients undergoing intensive cytotoxic therapy for acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplasia: a cost effectiveness analysis. Support Care Cancer 19, 1807–1813 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-010-1022-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-010-1022-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation