A cost-minimization analysis of dalbavancin compared to conventional therapy for the outpatient treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections

Single Intravenous Dose Dalbavancin Pathway for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections: Considerations for Emergency Department Implementation and Cost Savings

BACKGROUND

A pathway for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) with a single intravenous (IV) dose of dalbavancin was previously shown to reduce hospital admissions and shorten inpatient length of stay (LOS).

OBJECTIVES

To describe pathway implementation at the emergency department (ED) and evaluate cost-effectiveness of a single-dose dalbavancin administered to ED patients who would otherwise be hospitalized to receive usual care with multidose IV antibiotics.

METHODS

The dalbavancin pathway was previously implemented at 11 U.S. EDs (doi:10.1111/acem.14258). Patients with ABSSSI, without an unstable comorbidity or infection complication requiring complex management, were treated with a single dose of dalbavancin. At the emergency physicians' discretion, patients were either discharged and received outpatient follow-up or were hospitalized for continued management. A decision analytic cost-effectiveness model was developed from the U.S. healthcare's perspective to evaluate costs associated with the dalbavancin pathway compared with inpatient usual care. Costs (2021 USD) were modeled over a 14-day horizon and included ED visits, drug costs, inpatient stay, and physician visits. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses examined input parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

Driven largely by the per diem inpatient cost and LOS for usual care, the dalbavancin pathway was associated with savings of $5133.20 per patient and $1211.57 per hospitalization day avoided, compared with inpatient usual care. The results remained robust in sensitivity and scenario analyses.

CONCLUSION

The new single-dose dalbavancin ED pathway for ABSSSI treatment, which was previously implemented at 11 U.S. EDs, offers robust cost savings compared to inpatient usual care.

Cost evaluation of continuation of therapy with dalbavancin compared to standard-of-care antibiotics alone in hospitalized persons who inject drugs with severe gram-positive infections

PURPOSE

Persons who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk for severe gram-positive infections and may require prolonged hospitalization and intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. Dalbavancin (DBV) is a long-acting lipoglycopeptide that may reduce costs and provide effective treatment in this population.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of PWID with severe gram-positive infections. Patients admitted from January 1, 2017, to November 1, 2019 (standard-of-care [SOC] group) and from November 15, 2019, to March 31, 2022 (DBV group) were included. The primary outcome was the total cost to the healthcare system. Secondary outcomes included hospital days saved and treatment failure.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were included (37 in the DBV group and 50 in the SOC group). Patients were a median of 34 years old and were predominantly Caucasian (82%). Staphylococcus aureus (82%) was the most common organism, and bacteremia (71%) was the most common type of infection. Compared to the SOC group, the DBV group would have had a median of 14 additional days of hospitalization if they had stayed to complete their therapy (P = 0.014). The median total cost to the healthcare system was significantly lower in the DBV group than in the SOC group ($31,698.00 vs $45,093.50; P = 0.035). The rate of treatment failure was similar between the groups (32.4% in the DBV group vs 36% in the SOC group; P = 0.729).

CONCLUSION

DBV is a cost-saving alternative to SOC IV antibiotics for severe gram-positive infections in PWID, with similar treatment outcomes. Larger prospective studies, including other patient populations, may demonstrate additional benefit.

The Potential Utility of Single-Dose Long-Acting Intravenous Antibiotics for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin-Structure Infections in the Emergency Department

Acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSIs) are frequent clinical presentations to emergency departments (EDs) across the nation that can require substantial resources to treat due to several factors. These include an increasing prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) as the causative organism, limited availability of oral antibiotics that treat ABSSSIs secondary to MRSA, absorption and pharmacodynamic concerns with oral therapy, and regimen adherence. In patients who are unable to tolerate oral therapy, or are unable to adhere to prescribed antibiotics, inpatient admission for intravenous (IV) antibiotics may be necessary. Although inpatient IV antibiotics used to treat MRSA, such as vancomycin, are relatively inexpensive, hospital admission itself incurs significant associated costs. The introduction of the long-acting lipoglycopeptides, dalbavancin and oritavancin, has many potential advantages for the treatment of ABSSSIs including one- or two-dose regimens, allowing patients to receive their dose in the ED or infusion center and avoid inpatient admission altogether. Existing data have borne out these results, demonstrating that these agents can significantly reduce the length of hospital stay and the overall treatment cost of ABSSSIs. However, as these agents have nontraditional therapeutic regimens compared with alternative IV and oral agents that require consistent dosing, it is imperative to have decision support tools in place to ensure that this therapy is utilized in appropriate patients with ABSSSIs and that its true benefits can be realized for both the patient and the health care system.

Outpatient care concept and potential inpatient cost savings associated with the administration of dalbavancin - A real-world data and retrospective cost analysis

BACKGROUND

The treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) usually involves intravenous (i.v.) antibiotics requiring hospitalisation and increasing hospital costs. Since 2014, dalbavancin is approved for ABSSSIs treatment. However, evidence of its health economic impact on the German healthcare system is still limited.

METHODS

Diagnosis-related groups (DRG) based cost analysis was used to evaluate real-world data (RWD) from a German tertiary care center. All patients treated with i.v. antibiotics in the Department of Dermatology and Venereology at the University Hospital of Cologne were included to detect potential cost savings from a payer perspective. Thus, for the inpatient care German diagnosis-related groups (G-DRG) tariffs, length of stay (LOS), main- and secondary DRG-diagnoses and for the outpatient setting 'Einheitlicher Bewertungsmaßstab' (EBM) codes were evaluated.

RESULTS

This retrospective study identified 480 inpatient cases treated for ABSSSI between January 2016 until December 2020. Complete cost data were available for 433 cases and the detection of long-hospital-stay patients based on surcharges for exceeding the upper limit LOS led to 125 cases (29%) including 67 females (54%) and 58 males (46%) with an overall mean age of 63.6 years; all treated for International Classification of Diseases (ICD -10th revision) code A46 'erysipelas'. A sub-analysis focussed on DRG J64B with a total of 92 cases exceeding the upper limit LOS by a median of 3 days resulted in a median surcharge of €636 (mean value €749; SD €589; IQR €459-€785) per case. In comparison, we calculated outpatient treatment costs of approximately €55 per case. Thus, further treatment of these patients in an outpatient setting before exceeding the upper limit LOS might result in a cost-saving potential of approximately €581 per case.

CONCLUSION

Dalbavancin appears a cost-efficient option to reduce inpatient treatment costs by transitioning to an outpatient setting of patients with ABSSSI potentially exceeding the upper limit LOS.

Cost analysis of dalbavancin versus standard of care for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) in two Italian hospitals

Objectives

Thanks to its long half-life, dalbavancin qualifies as an optimal drug for saving costs. We aimed to assess the cost and effectiveness of dalbavancin versus the standard of care (SoC).

Patients and methods

We conducted a multicentre retrospective study, including all hospitalized or outpatients diagnosed with ABSSSIs at Padua University Hospital, Padua and San Paolo Hospital, Milan (1 January 2016 to 31 July 2020). We compared patients according to antibiotic treatment (dalbavancin versus SoC), the number of lines of dalbavancin treatment, and monotherapy or combination (dalbavancin in association with other antibiotics). Primary endpoints were direct medical costs and length of hospital stay (LOS) associated with ABSSSI management; Student's t-test, chi-squared test and one-way ANOVA were used.

Results

One hundred and twenty-six of 228 (55.3%) patients received SoC, while 102/228 (44.7%) received dalbavancin. Twenty-seven of the 102 (26.5%) patients received dalbavancin as first-line treatment, 46 (45.1%) as second-line, and 29 (28.4%) as third- or higher-line treatment. Most patients received dalbavancin as monotherapy (62/102; 60.8%). Compared with SoC, dalbavancin was associated with a significant reduction of LOS (5 ± 7.47 days for dalbavancin, 9.2 ± 5.59 days for SoC; P < 0.00001) and with lower mean direct medical costs (3470 ± 2768€ for dalbavancin; 3493 ± 1901€ for SoC; P = 0.9401). LOS was also reduced for first-line dalbavancin, in comparison with second-, third- or higher-line groups, and for dalbavancin monotherapy versus combination therapy. Mean direct medical costs were significantly lower in first-line dalbavancin compared with higher lines, but no cost difference was observed between monotherapy and combination therapy.

Conclusions

Monotherapy with first-line dalbavancin was confirmed as a promising strategy for ABSSSIs in real-life settings, thanks to its property in reducing LOS and saving direct medical costs.

Cost analysis of disease including treatment with dalbavancin in a Spanish hospital: ECODAL ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Dalbavancin is an antibiotic with activity against gram-positive bacteria that allows early discharge of patients requiring intravenous therapy. Outpatient treatment helps offset hospitalisation costs associated with standard intravenous treatment. Our objective was to assess the cost of disease management, including treatment with dalbavancin, in a Spanish hospital for 1 year, and the hypothetical costs associated with treatment with other therapeutic alternatives to dalbavancin.

METHODS

A single-centre, observational, retrospective post-hoc analysis was conducted based on electronic medical records analysing all patients who received dalbavancin treatment for 1 year; cost analysis was performed for the whole process. In addition, three scenarios designed on the basis of real clinical practice by clinical experts were hypothesised: (i) individual therapeutic alternative to dalbavancin, (ii) all patients treated with daptomycin, and (iii) all days of dalbavancin as outpatient treatment transformed into hospital stay. Costs were obtained from the hospital.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were treated with dalbavancin; their mean age was 57.9 years, and 70.6% were men. The main reasons for dalbavancin use were outpatient management (61.7%, n = 21) and ensuring treatment adherence (26.5%, n = 9). The main indications were: osteoarticular infection (32.4%) and infective endocarditis (29.4%). One-half (50%) of the infections were due to Staphylococcus aureus (23.5% were methicillin resistant). All patients achieved clinical resolution, and no costs associated with dalbavancin-associated adverse events or re-admissions were reported. The mean total cost of treatment was 22,738€per patient, with the greatest expenditures in interventions (8,413€) and hospital stay (6,885€). The mean cost of dalbavancin treatment was 3,936€; without dalbavancin, this cost could have been increased to 3,324-11,038€depending on the scenario, mainly due to hospital stays.

MAIN LIMITATION

Limited sample size obtained from a single centre.

CONCLUSION

The economic impact of the management of these infections is high. The cost of dalbavancin is offset by the decreased length of stay.

Optimizing Clinical Outcomes Through Rational Dosing Strategies: Roles of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Modeling Tools

Significant progress in previous decades has led to several methodologies developed to facilitate the design of optimal antimicrobial dosing. In this review, we highlight common pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) modeling techniques and their roles in guiding rational dosing regimen design. In the early drug development phases, dose fractionation studies identify the PKPD index most closely associated with bacterial killing. Once discerned, this index is linked to clinical efficacy end points, and classification and regression tree analysis can be used to define the PKPD target goal. Monte Carlo simulations integrate PKPD and microbiological data to identify dosing strategies with a high probability of achieving the established PKPD target. Results then determine dosing regimens to investigate and/or validate the findings of randomized controlled trials. Further improvements in PKPD modeling could lead to an era of precision dosing and personalized therapeutics.

Role or oritavancin and dalbavancin in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and other potential indications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the currently available evidence about the use oritavancin and dalbavancin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and for other potential indications.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review, we briefly summarize the available data on efficacy (from randomized controlled trials) and on effectiveness and cure rates (from observational studies) pertaining to the use of oritavancin and dalbavancin either for ABSSSI or for other indications.

SUMMARY

Oritavancin and dalbavancin are valid options for outpatient therapy and early discharge in patients with ABSSSI, especially when adherence to oral therapy cannot be guaranteed or no oral choices are available. Furthermore, it is worth noting that a non-negligible portion (sometimes the majority) of oritavancin and dalbavancin use in available real-life experiences is for indications other than ABSSSI, especially for Gram-positive osteomyelitis and endocarditis. The number of studies on the use of long-acting lipoglycopeptides for these currently off-label indications is rapidly increasing and will help to further optimize the use of these peculiar antibiotics in the forthcoming future.

Dalbavancin Efficacy and Impact on Hospital Length-of-Stay and Treatment Costs in Different Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections

Background and Objectives

The study aimed to evaluate the impact of dalbavancin therapy on both hospital length-of-stay (LOS) and treatment-related costs, as well as to describe the clinical outcome, in a retrospective cohort of patients with diverse Gram-positive bacterial infections, hospitalized in different specialty Units.

Methods

From July 2017 to July 2019, clinical and sociodemographic data were collected for all hospitalized patients switched to dalbavancin for the treatment of Gram-positive infections. LOS and treatment-related costs were assessed and compared to a hypothetical scenario where the initial standard antimicrobial therapy would have been administered in hospital for the same duration as dalbavancin.

Results

A total of 50 patients were enrolled. The observed infections were: acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs, 12 patients), complicated ABSSSIs (eight patients), osteoarticular infections (18 patients), vascular graft or cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) infections (12 patients). After a median of 14 [interquartile range (IQR) 7–28] days, the in-hospital antimicrobial therapy was switched to dalbavancin 1500 mg. When appropriate, considering the site and the clinical course of the infection, 1500 mg doses were repeated every 14 days until recovery. Overall, 49/50 (98%) patients reported clinical success at the end of therapy. No relapses were observed in 37 patients for whom a median follow-up of 150 (IQR 30–180) days was available. By switching to dalbavancin, a median of €8,259 (IQR 5644–17,270) and 14 hospital days (IQR 22–47) per patient were saved.

Conclusions

In this experience, the use of dalbavancin contributed to shorten LOS and treatment-related costs, especially in difficult Gram-positive infections requiring prolonged therapy.

Diabetes and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

Acute bacterial skin and skin structures infections (ABSSSIs) are associated with high morbidity, costs and mortality in patients with diabetes mellitus. Their appropriate management should include several figures and a well-organized approach. This review aims to highlight the interplay between diabetes and ABSSSIs and bring out the unmet clinical needs in this area. Pathogenetic mechanisms underlying the increased risk of ABSSSIs in diabetes mellitus are multifactorial: high glucose levels play a crucial pathogenetic role in the tissue damage and delayed clinical cure. Moreover, the presence of diabetes complications (neuropathy, vasculopathy) further complicates the management of ABSSSIs in patients with diabetes. Multidrug resistance organisms should be considered in this population based on patient risk factors and local epidemiology and etiological diagnosis should be obtained whenever possible. Moreover, drug-drug interactions and drug-related adverse events (such as nephrotoxicity) should be considered in the choice of antibiotic therapy. Reducing unnecessary hospitalizations and prolonged length of hospital stay is of primary importance now, more than ever. To achieve these objectives, a better knowledge of the interplay between acute and chronic hyperglycemia, multidrug resistant etiology, and short and long-term outcome is needed. Of importance, a multidisciplinary approach is crucial to achieve full recovery of these patients.

Cost-consequence analysis of single-dose dalbavancin versus standard of care for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in a multi-site healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) are common infectious diseases that cause a significant economic burden on the healthcare system. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of dalbavancin versus standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of ABSSSI in a community-based healthcare system.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of adult patients with ABSSSI treated with dalbavancin or SoC during a 27-month period. Patients were matched based on age and body mass index. The primary outcome was average net cost of care to the healthcare system per patient, calculated as the difference between reimbursement payments and the total cost to provide care to the patient. The secondary outcome was proportion of cases successfully treated, defined as no ABSSSI-related readmission within 30-days after the initiation of treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 418 matched patients, 209 received SoC and 209 received dalbavancin. The average total cost of care per patient was greater with dalbavancin versus SoC ($ 4770 vs $ 2709, p < 0.0001). The average reimbursement per patient was $3084 with dalbavancin versus $2633 SoC (p = 0.527). The net cost, calculated as revenue minus total cost, was $1685 with dalbavancin versus $75 with SoC (p = 0.013). The overall treatment success rate was 74% with dalbavancin versus 85% with SoC (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Dalbavancin was more costly than SoC for the treatment of ABSSSI, with a higher 30-days readmission rate. Dalbavancin does not offer an economic or efficacy advantage.

Acute wound infections management: the 'Don'ts' from a multidisciplinary expert panel

Introduction: The management of acute wounds may be affected by malpractices leading to poor outcome, prolonged hospital stay and inappropriate use of antibiotic therapy.Areas covered: Acute wound infections are represented by surgical site and post-traumatic infections. The aim of this expert opinion is to identify a list of inadvisable actions and to provide a guide for an optimal management of acute wound infections. A literature search using Pubmed/MEDLINE database was performed. Articles pertaining to areas covered published until December 2019 were selected. We identified the most common malpractices in this setting and, using the Choosing Wisely methodology, we proposed a list of "Don'ts" for an easy use in clinical practice.Expert opinion: Malpractices may occur from the surgical prophylaxis to the discharge of patient. A prolonged surgical prophylaxis, the underestimation of signs and symptoms, the omission of source control, the inappropriate collection of wound swab, the improper use of clinical microbiology and pharmacology, the lack of hygiene measures and the delay of discharge are all factors that may lead to unfavorable outcome. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to optimally manage these patients. The "Don'ts" refer to all professional figures involved in the management of patients with acute wound infections.