Economic evaluation of posaconazole vs fluconazole in the prevention of invasive fungal infections in patients with GVHD following haematopoietic SCT

Budget Impact of Microbial Cell-Free DNA Testing Using the Karius® Test as an Alternative to Invasive Procedures in Immunocompromised Patients with Suspected Invasive Fungal Infections

BACKGROUND

Invasive fungal infection is a major source of morbidity and mortality. The usage of microbial cell-free DNA for the detection and identification of invasive fungal infection has been considered as a potential alternative to invasive procedures allowing for rapid results.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis aimed to assess the budget implications of using the Karius^® Test in patients suspected of invasive fungal infection in an average state in the USA from a healthcare payer perspective.

METHODS

The analysis used a decision tree to capture key stages of the patient pathway, from suspected invasive fungal infection to either receiving treatment for invasive fungal infection or being confirmed as having no invasive fungal infection. The analysis used published costs and resource use from a targeted review of the literature. Because of the paucity of published evidence on the reduction of diagnostic tests displaced by the Karius Test, the analysis used a 50% reduction in the use of bronchoscopy and/or bronchoalveolar lavage. The impact of this reduction was tested in a scenario analysis.

RESULTS

The results of the analysis show that the introduction of the Karius Test is associated with a cost saving of US$2277 per patient; when multiplied by the estimated number of cases per year, the cost saving is US$17,039,666. The scenario analysis showed that the Karius Test only had an incremental cost of US$87 per patient when there was no reduction in bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage.

CONCLUSIONS

The Karius Test may offer a valuable and timely option for the diagnosis of invasive fungal infection through its non-invasive approach and subsequent cost savings.

Cost-effectiveness of posaconazole tablets versus fluconazole as prophylaxis for invasive fungal diseases in patients with graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of posaconazole oral suspension versus fluconazole capsules for the prophylaxis of invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) in immunosuppressed allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients has already been proven. Now, a new solid oral tablet formulation for posaconazole has been developed with improved bioavailability, allowing a reduced daily dosage that can be taken independently of food intake. However, the efficacy of this new formulation should be evaluated since it is associated with a higher cost than the posaconazole oral suspension.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of solid oral tablets of posaconazole versus fluconazole capsules for the prophylaxis of IFDs in allogeneic HSCT recipients with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in Spain.

METHODOLOGY

A mathematical model comparing the efficacy and costs of posaconazole versus fluconazole was adapted to the Spanish National Healthcare System. Clinical data were obtained from the pivotal clinical trial of posaconazole oral suspension for allogeneic HSCT recipients, while pharmacological costs and use of resources were obtained from national sources. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA), as well as two alternative scenarios, were run to evaluate the robustness of the results under varying input values.

RESULTS

Posaconazole tablets reduced the number of IFD events and enhanced overall survival, while maintaining a controlled budget. When compared to fluconazole, it was found to be a cost-effective alternative, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €13,193/life years gained. The PSA showed that posaconazole remained cost-effective in 74.6% of the cases, while alternatives scenarios yielded similar results as the base case.

CONCLUSIONS

Posaconazole tablets are a cost-effective alternative to fluconazole and may show better results than the oral suspension formulation.

Economic evaluation of azoles as primary prophylaxis for the prevention of invasive fungal infections in Spanish patients undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplant

Patients undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) are at risk of developing invasive fungal infections (IFIs). Even with introduction of oral triazole antifungal agents (fluconazole, itraconazole, posaconazole and voriconazole) IFI-associated morbidity and mortality rates and economic burden remain high. Despite their proven efficacy, it is currently unknown which is the most cost-effective antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) agent. To determine the costs and outcomes associated with AFP, a decision-analytic model was used to simulate treatment in a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients undergoing alloHSCT from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. Generic itraconazole was the least costly AFP (€162) relative to fluconazole (€500), posaconazole oral suspension (€8628) or voriconazole (€6850). Compared with posaconazole, voriconazole was associated with the lowest number of breakthrough IFIs (36 vs 60); thus, the model predicted fewer deaths from breakthrough IFI for voriconazole (24) than posaconazole (33), and the lowest predicted costs associated with other licensed antifungal treatment and IFI treatment in a cohort of 1000. Voriconazole resulted in cost savings of €4707 per patient compared with posaconazole. Itraconazole demonstrated a high probability of being cost-effective. As primary AFP in alloHSCT patients 180 days posttransplant, voriconazole was more likely to be cost-effective than posaconazole regarding cost per additional IFI and additional death avoided.

Pharmacologic and clinical evaluation of posaconazole

Posaconazole, a broad-spectrum triazole antifungal agent, is approved for the prevention of invasive aspergillosis and candidiasis in addition to the treatment of oropharyngeal candidiasis. There is evidence of efficacy in the treatment and prevention of rarer, more difficult-to-treat fungal infections. Posaconazole oral suspension solution has shown limitations with respect to fasting state absorption, elevated gastrointestinal pH and increased motility. The newly approved delayed-release oral tablet and intravenous solution formulations provide an attractive treatment option by reducing interpatient variability and providing flexibility in critically ill patients. On the basis of clinical experience and further clinical studies, posaconazole was found to be a valuable pharmaceutical agent for the treatment of life-threatening fungal infections. This review will examine the development history of posaconazole and highlight the most recent advances.

Feasibility and effectiveness of posaconazole prophylaxis in combination with micafungin bridging for patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation: a 6-yr analysis from the cologne cohort for neutropenic patients

INTRODUCTION

Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT).

METHODS

To compare the effectiveness of two prophylactic antifungal regimens used as standard of care (SOC) in the setting of SCT during the periods of May 2006 - September 2009 (oral posaconazole, POS) and October 2009 - July 2011 (oral posaconazole with intravenous micafungin bridging, POS-MIC), data from the Cologne Cohort of Neutropenic Patients (CoCoNut) study were analyzed after nearest-neighbor matching. Endpoints were occurrence of breakthrough probable/proven IFD under prophylaxis, incidence and duration of persistent febrile neutropenia, incidence of unspecific pneumonic infiltrates, possible IFD, positive galactomannan tests, as well as fungal-free and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 291 patients with 307 SCTs observed during the study period, 212 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included into the analysis. Patients receiving POS-MIC were less likely to develop a pneumonic infiltrate (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-1.00) or possible IFD (RR 0.36, 95% 0.15-0.87). They also demonstrated improved fungal-free survival at day 100 (P = 0.009). No significant differences were observed for the incidence of probable or proven IFD, positive galactomannan tests, persistent febrile neutropenia, duration of hospitalization and overall mortality. There was no grade III or IV CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) toxicity related to antifungal prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that both prophylactic regimens, POS and POS-MIC are feasible, safe and effective. Our data suggest that bridging with intravenous micafungin could indeed improve exposure to antifungal prophylaxis, which may explain the reduced incidence of pneumonia and IFD in the bridging group.

Oral complications and management strategies for patients undergoing cancer therapy

With cancer survival rate climbing up over the past three decades, quality of life for cancer patients has become an issue of major concern. Oral health plays an important part in one's overall quality of life. However, oral health status can be severely hampered by side effects of cancer therapies including surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Moreover, prevention and treatment of these complications are often overlooked in clinical practice. The present paper aims at drawing health care professionals' attention to oral complications associated with cancer therapy by giving a comprehensive review. Brief comments on contemporary cancer therapies will be given first, followed by detailed description of oral complications associated with cancer therapy. Finally, a summary of preventive strategies and treatment options for common oral complications including oral mucositis, oral infections, xerostomia, and dysgeusia will be given.

Newer antifungal agents for fungal infection prevention during hematopoietic cell transplantation: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy of newer antifungal agents to provide effective prophylaxis during stem cell transplantation has not yet been established. We compared the clinical outcomes using of the newer triazoles and echinocandins for antifungal prophylaxis.

METHODS

We electronically searched the databases of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Pubmed, EMBASE, and relevant articles from 1987 through 2011. We examined comparative studies for survival, proven fungal infections, mortality, and adverse effects. Our meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager 5.1.6 software with funnel plot regression analysis to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

Among 1443 records were 17 studies including 5122 patients for analyses. Pooled comparisons of studies showed antifungal prophylaxis with the new agents to reduce the incidence of invasive fungal infections greater than fluconazole or itraconazole. A reduction in invasive fungal infections was achieved using micafungin, voriconazole, and posaconazole for antifungal prophylaxis. Posaconazole and voriconazole prophylaxis decreased transplant mortality compared with fluconazole or itraconazole prophylaxis. Voriconazole and posaconzole showed greater rates of liver dysfunction and lower incidences gastrointestinal side effects than fluconazole. Caspofungin and voriconazole treatment incurred lower rates of nephrotoxic effects than amphotericin B. Only voriconazole displayed significantly decreased adverse events requiring drug discontinuation compared with fluconazole or itraconazole.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis indicated new antifungal agents were well-tolerated with manageable side effects. They were beneficial for prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections.

Cost-effectiveness of primary antifungal prophylaxis with posaconazole versus itraconazole in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of posaconazole vs itraconazole in the prevention of invasive fungal infections (IFIs) in recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT).

METHODS

Total hospital-based costs from initial admission for allo-HSCT until day 100 after transplantation were evaluated for 49 patients in whom the clinical efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis with posaconazole vs itraconazole had been previously analyzed and reported. Clinical and economic data were used to determine the incremental costs per IFI avoided and per life-year gained for posaconazole compared with itraconazole. Confidence intervals for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve were estimated through bootstrapping with the bias-corrected percentile method.

RESULTS

According to our analysis, the total cost of allo-HSCT per patient during the 100-day fixed-treatment period was €46,562 in the posaconazole group (n = 33) and €45,080 in the itraconazole group (n = 16). However, the reduction in the incidence of IFI and the improved outcome with posaconazole resulted in a favorable ICER of €11,856 per IFI avoided and €5218 per life-year gained. With the outcomes of the bootstrap procedure, the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve was constructed. Assuming a threshold of €30,000 per life-year gained, the ICER based on life-years gained is acceptable with 75% certainty.

LIMITATIONS

This evaluation is based on data from a single-center, non-randomized study. Preference weights or utilities were not available to calculate quality-adjusted life-years. Extra-mural costs were only partially evaluated from a hospital perspective. Indirect costs and economic consequences are not included.

CONCLUSIONS

This economic evaluation compared direct medical costs associated with posaconazole or itraconazole treatment; the data suggest that posaconazole may be cost-effective as antifungal prophylaxis during the early high-risk neutropenic period and up to 100 days after allo-HSCT.

Mould-active compared with fluconazole prophylaxis to prevent invasive fungal diseases in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Background:

Objectives were to compare systemic mould-active vs fluconazole prophylaxis in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

Methods:

We searched OVID MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1948-August 2011) and EMBASE (1980-August 2011). Randomised controlled trials of mould-active vs fluconazole prophylaxis in cancer or HSCT patients were included. Primary outcome was proven/probable invasive fungal infections (IFI). Analysis was completed by computing relative risks (RRs) using a random-effects model and Mantel–Haenszel method.

Results:

From 984 reviewed articles, 20 were included in this review. Mould-active compared with fluconazole prophylaxis significantly reduced the number of proven/probable IFI (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.98; P=0.03). Mould-active prophylaxis also decreased the risk of invasive aspergillosis (IA; RR 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37–0.75; P=0.0004) and IFI-related mortality (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47–0.96; P=0.03) but is also associated with an increased risk of adverse events (AEs) leading to antifungal discontinuation (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.24–3.07; P=0.004). There was no decrease in overall mortality (RR 1.0; 95% CI 0.88–1.13; P=0.96).

Conclusion:

Mould-active compared with fluconazole prophylaxis significantly reduces proven/probable IFI, IA, and IFI-related mortality in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or HSCT, but increases AE and does not affect overall mortality.(PROSPERO Registration: CRD420111174)

Posaconazole plasma concentrations and invasive mould infections in patients with haematological malignancies

Posaconazole (PCZ) is a triazole antifungal agent that has broad activity against pathogenic fungi and is increasingly used for prophylaxis and treatment of invasive mould infections (IMIs). PCZ is only available as an oral formulation, with varying absorption from the gastrointestinal tract. However, reports correlating PCZ plasma concentrations (PPCs) with breakthrough IMIs are rare. In this study, PPCs were analysed in a prospective, observational, single-centre study and the correlation of PPCs with breakthrough IMIs in patients with haematological malignancies was evaluated. Risk factors associated with low PPCs were further evaluated. A total of 109 PPCs were measured in 34 cases receiving PCZ prophylaxis (n=31) or treatment (n=3). Levels below the target of 0.5 μg/mL were detected in 24 (71%) of the 34 cases; in 15 (63%) of these 24 cases concentrations were found to be <0.20 μg/mL. Three patients receiving PCZ prophylaxis met the criteria of breakthrough infection. Notably, prior to development of IMI, PPCs were below the target in all three individuals. Associated risk factors for insufficient PPCs varied from previous reports. In conclusion, these data demonstrate that therapeutic drug monitoring of PCZ is mandatory in all patients with haematological malignancies as low PPCs are common and may be associated with development of IMIs.

Posaconazole prophylaxis during front-line chemotherapy of acute myeloid leukemia: a single-center, real-life experience

BACKGROUND

Posaconazole is effective as primary antifungal prophylaxis of invasive fungal diseases in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The impact of primary antifungal prophylaxis administered during front-line chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia was evaluated by comparing 58 patients who received oral amphotericin B (control group) to 99 patients who received oral posaconazole (posaconazole group). The primary endpoint was the incidence of proven/probable invasive fungal diseases. Secondary endpoints included incidence of invasive aspergillosis, survival at 4 and 12 months after the diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia and costs.

RESULTS

Proven/probable invasive fungal diseases were documented in 51.7% of patients in the control group and in 23.2% in the posaconazole group (P=0.0002). Invasive aspergillosis was documented in 43% of patients in the control group and in 15% in the posaconazole group (P=0.002). No survival difference was observed in patients aged over 60 years. In patients aged 60 years or less, a statistically significant survival advantage was observed at 4 months, but no longer at 12 months, in the posaconazole group (P=0.03). It was calculated that in the posaconazole group there was a mean 50% cost reduction for the antifungal drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary antifungal prophylaxis with posaconazole during front-line chemotherapy was effective in preventing invasive fungal diseases in a "real-life" scenario of patients with acute myeloid leukemia, resulted in an early but transitory survival advantage in younger patients and was economically advantageous.

Posaconazole: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in the prophylaxis of invasive fungal disease in immunocompromised hosts

Posaconazole (Noxafil®) is an oral, second-generation, extended-spectrum triazole whose approved indications include prophylaxis of invasive fungal disease (IFD) in immunocompromised patients. In pivotal head-to-head trials, posaconazole was significantly more effective in preventing IFD than standard azole therapy (i.e. oral fluconazole or itraconazole) in chemotherapy-induced neutropenic patients with acute myelogenous leukaemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and was noninferior to treatment with fluconazole in patients with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) who were receiving intensive immunosuppressive therapy following haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In both indications, prophylactic posaconazole was associated with significantly lower rates of IFD-related mortality. The overall tolerability profile of posaconazole was generally similar to that of the other prophylactic treatments. The large body of modelled cost-effectiveness analyses from a healthcare payer perspective on the use of prophylactic posaconazole suggest that it is a dominant or cost-effective option relative to prophylaxis with standard azole therapy in neutropenic patients with AML/MDS, and fluconazole in patients with GVHD. Based on clinical trial data in these patient groups, antifungal prophylaxis with posaconazole was predicted to be a dominant or cost-effective option relative to prophylaxis with standard oral azoles, with regard to the incremental cost per QALY gained, life-year (LY) gained and/or other outcomes in cost-effectiveness analyses in numerous countries. In those analyses in which posaconazole did not dominate the comparator, posaconazole was considered cost effective, as the incremental cost per QALY or LY gained with posaconazole was lower than assumed willingness-to-pay thresholds. Sensitivity analyses consistently demonstrated that these results were robust to plausible changes in key model assumptions. In conclusion, prophylactic treatment with posaconazole is clinically effective in preventing IFD in neutropenic patients with AML/MDS and patients with GVHD. Available pharmacoeconomic data from several countries, despite some inherent limitations, support the use of posaconazole as a dominant or cost-effective prophylactic antifungal treatment relative to prophylaxis with standard oral azoles in these patient populations at high risk of developing IFD.

Prevalence of invasive fungal disease in hematological patients at a tertiary university hospital in Singapore

Background

The use of newer azoles as prophylaxis in hematological patients undergoing stem cell transplantation or immunosuppressive chemotherapy has been shown to decrease the risk of developing invasive fungal disease (IFD). However, the cost-effectiveness of such a strategy is dependent on the local epidemiology of IFD. We conducted an audit of hematological patients with IFD in our institution in order to derive the prevalence and types of IFD that occur locally.

Findings

We conducted a retrospective chart review of all hematological patients who developed possible, probable or definite IFD according to EORTC/MSG criteria in the period from Oct 2007 to Apr 2010. The prevalence of IFD was determined via correlation with institutional database records of all hematological patients treated at our institution over the same time period.

There were 39 cases of IFD diagnosed during the study period, with 8 (20.5%) possible, 19 (48.7%) probable and 12 (30.8%) definite cases of IFD. Aspergillus spp. accounted for 83.9% of all probable and definite infections. There was 1 case each of Rhinocladelia spp., Coprinopsis cinerea, Exserohilum spp. sinusitis and Rhizopus spp. sinusitis. IFD occurred in 12 of 124 (9.7%) AML and 4 of 103 (3.9%) ALL patients treated at our institution respectively. There were 10 (16.1%) infections among 62 allogeneic HSCT recipients, six of whom were having concurrent graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Five other cases occurred after allogeneic HSCT failure, following salvage chemotherapy for disease relapse. The prevalence of IFD during induction chemotherapy was 8.9% (11 of 124 cases) for AML and 1.0% (1 of 103 cases) for ALL. Fluconazole prophylaxis had been provided for 28 out of the 39 (71.8%) cases, while 4 (10.3%) were on itraconazole prophylaxis. The in-hospital mortality was 28.2% (11 of 39 cases), of which 5 (12.8%) deaths were attributed to IFD.

Conclusions

The burden of IFD is high in our institution, especially in allogeneic HSCT recipients and patients on induction chemotherapy for AML. A prophylactic strategy directed against invasive mould infections for local high-risk patients may be considered as the comparative costs of treatment, prolonged hospitalisation and subsequent delayed chemotherapy favours such an approach.

A systematic review of oral fungal infections in patients receiving cancer therapy

PURPOSE

The aims of this systematic review were to determine, in patients receiving cancer therapy, the prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection and fungal colonization, to determine the impact on quality of life and cost of care, and to review current management strategies for oral fungal infections.

METHODS

Thirty-nine articles that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were independently reviewed by two calibrated reviewers, each using a standard form. Information was extracted on a number of variables, including study design, study population, sample size, interventions, blinding, outcome measures, methods, results, and conclusions for each article. Areas of discrepancy between the two reviews were resolved by consensus. Studies were weighted as to the quality of the study design, and recommendations were based on the relative strength of each paper. Statistical analyses were performed to determine the weighted prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection and fungal colonization.

RESULTS

For all cancer treatments, the weighted prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection was found to be 7.5% pre-treatment, 39.1% during treatment, and 32.6% after the end of cancer therapy. Head and neck radiotherapy and chemotherapy were each independently associated with a significantly increased risk for oral fungal infection. For all cancer treatments, the prevalence of oral colonization with fungal organisms was 48.2% before treatment, 72.2% during treatment, and 70.1% after treatment. The prophylactic use of fluconazole during cancer therapy resulted in a prevalence of clinical fungal infection of 1.9%. No information specific to oral fungal infections was found on quality of life or cost of care.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increased risk of clinically significant oral fungal infection during cancer therapy. Systemic antifungals are effective in the prevention of clinical oral fungal infection in patients receiving cancer therapy. Currently available topical antifungal agents are less efficacious, suggesting a need for better topical agents.