Economic evaluation of micafungin versus caspofungin for the treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis

Internal Medicine Journal

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 668-677

  Neoh, C F ^a,f   Liew, D ^b   Slavin, M A ^c   Marriott, D ^d   Chen, S C A ^e   Morrissey, O ^a   Stewart, K ^a   Kong, D C M ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c PETER MACCALLUM CANCER CENTRE   (Australia)

^d ST VINCENT S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^e WESTMEAD HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^f University of Technology Mara Penang   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Candida spp.; Echinocandin; Economic; Micafungin; Modelling

Indexed keywords

AMPHOTERICIN B LIPID COMPLEX; CASPOFUNGIN; CONVENTIONAL AMPHOTERICIN B; FLUCONAZOLE; MICAFUNGIN; POSACONAZOLE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VORICONAZOLE;

ARTICLE; CANDIDEMIA; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INVASIVE CANDIDIASIS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SINGLE DRUG DOSE; TREATMENT FAILURE;

ANTIFUNGAL AGENTS; CANDIDEMIA; CANDIDIASIS, INVASIVE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECHINOCANDINS; HUMANS; LIPOPEPTIDES; MODELS, ECONOMIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84879022048     PISSN: 14440903     EISSN: 14455994     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/imj.12110     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Thursky KA, Playford EG, Seymour JF, Sorrell TC, Ellis DH, Guy SD etal. Recommendations for the treatment of established fungal infections. Intern Med J 2008; 38: 496-520.
2. Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D, Benjamin DK, Jr, Calandra TF, Edwards JE, Jr. etal. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48: 503-535.
3. Slavin MA. Introduction to the updated Australian and New Zealand consensus guidelines for the use of antifungal agents in the haematology/oncology setting. Intern Med J 2008; 38: 457-467.
4. Golan Y, Harrison D, Fahrbach K. An echinocandin vs. a comparator antifungal in Candida bloodstream infections: a meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect 2010; 16: S93.
5. Rex JH, Bennett JE, Sugar AM, Pappas PG, van der Horst CM, Edwards JE etal. A randomized trial comparing fluconazole with amphotericin B for the treatment of candidemia in patients without neutropenia. Candidemia Study Group and the National Institute. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 1325-1330.
6. Chen S, Slavin M, Nguyen Q, Marriott D, Playford EG, Ellis D etal. Active surveillance for candidemia, Australia. Emerg Infect Dis 2006; 12: 1508-1516.
7. Slavin MA. The epidemiology of candidaemia and mould infections in Australia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 49: 3-6.
8. Vazquez JA, Sobel JD. Anidulafungin: a novel echinocandin. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 43: 215-222.
9. Eschenauer G, Depestel DD, Carver PL. Comparison of echinocandin antifungals. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2007; 3: 71-97.
10. Pappas PG, Rotstein CMF, Betts RF, Nucci M, Talwar D, De Waele JJ etal. Micafungin versus caspofungin for treatment of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45: 883-893.
11. Chen SC, Slavin MA, Sorrell TC. Echinocandin antifungal drugs in fungal infections: a comparison. Drugs 2011; 71: 11-41.
12. Wagner C, Graninger W, Presterl E, Joukhadar C. The echinocandins: comparison of their pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical applications. Pharmacology 2006; 78: 161-177.
13. Neoh CF, Liew D, Slavin M, Marriott D, Chen S, Morrissey O etal. Cost-effectiveness analysis of anidulafungin versus fluconazole for the treatment of invasive candidiasis (IC). J Antimicrob Chemother 2011; 66: 1906-1915.
14. Reboli AC, Rotstein C, Kett DH, Maschio M, Cartier S, Chambers R etal. Resource utilization and cost of treatment with anidulafungin or fluconazole for candidaemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis: focus on critically ill patients. PharmacoEconomics 2011; 29: 705-717.
15. Park G, Sidhu M, Van Engen AK, Schoeman O. Economic analysis of micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis in the United Kingdom. Value Health 2008; 11: A100-101.
16. Viale P, Sidhu M, van Engen A, Schoeman O. Economic analysis of micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis in Italy. Value Health 2008; 11: A432.
17. Cornely OA, Sidhu M, Odeyemi I, van Engen AK, van der Waal JM, Schoeman O. Economic analysis of micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis in Germany. Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24: 1743-1753.
18. Wingard JR, Wood CA, Sullivan E, Berger ML, Gerth WC, Mansley EC. Caspofungin versus amphotericin B for candidemia: a pharmacoeconomic analysis. Clin Ther 2005; 27: 960-969.
19. Sidhu MK, van Engen AK, Kleintjens J, Schoeman O, Palazzo M. Cost-effectiveness analysis of micafungin versus caspofungin for treatment of systemic Candida infections in the United Kingdom. Curr Med Res Opin 2009; 25: 2049-2059.
20. Marriott DJ, Playford EG, Chen S, Slavin M, Nguyen Q, Ellis D etal. Determinants of mortality in non-neutropenic ICU patients with candidaemia. Crit Care 2009; 13: R115.
21. Australian Bureau of Statistics [homepage on the Internet]. Canberra: national health survey: summary of results. 2005 [cited 1 Aug 2011]. Available from URL: http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/3B1917236618A042CA25711F00185526/$File/43640_2004-05.pdf
22. Australian Bureau of Statistics [homepage on the Internet]. Canberra: consumer price index. 2010 [cited 1 Aug 2011]. Available from URL: http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/meisubs.nsf/0/DB27E14A103FB951CA25776D001B5ADF/$File/64010_jun%202010.pdf
23. Australian Government of Health and Ageing [homepage on the Internet]. Canberra: national hospital cost data collection. 2010; Round 13 (2008-09) Cost Report Version 5.2 [cited 1 Aug 2011]. Available from URL: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EB1A34EB4E8208ECCA25773B00031A09/$File/HeaderR13CWNatEst.pdf
24. Rechner IJ, Lipman J. The costs of caring for patients in a tertiary referral Australian intensive care unit. Anaesth Intensive Care 2005; 33: 477-482.
25. Australian Government of Health and Ageing [homepage on the Internet]. Canberra: medicare benefits schedule book. 2010 [cited 1 Aug 2011]. Available from URL: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/mbsonline/publishing.nsf/Content/BBE433BF3FE34A39CA257735001236D4/$File/201007-MBS.pdf
26. Health Purchasing Victoria [homepage on the Internet]. Victoria: health purchasing victoria tender (2010-2012). 2010 [cited 3 Nov 2011]. Available from URL: http://www.hpv.org.au/
27. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Pharmaceutical Pricing Policies in a Global Market. OECD Publishing; 2008.
28. O'Hagan A, Stevenson M, Madan J. Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis for patient level simulation models: efficient estimation of mean and variance using ANOVA. Health Econ 2007; 16: 1009-1023.
29. Vose D. Risk Analysis: A Quantitative Guide. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008.
30. Dixon S, McKeen E, Tabberer M, Paisley S. Economic evaluations of treatments for systemic fungal infections: a systematic review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22: 421-433.
31. Johnson MD, Kleinberg M, Danziger L, Ostrosky-Zeichner L. Pharmacoeconomics of antifungal pharmacotherapy: challenges and future directions. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2005; 6: 2617-2632.
32. Nixon J, Stoykova B, Glanville J, Christie J, Drummond M, Kleijnen J. The U.K. NHS economic evaluation database. Economic issues in evaluations of health technology. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16: 731-742.
33. Jain S, Arora NK. Randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation. Indian J Pediatr 2000; 67: 363-368.
34. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000.
35. Rentz AM, Halpern MT, Bowden R. The impact of candidemia on length of hospital stay, outcome, and overall cost of illness. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 27: 781-788.
36. Rotstein C, Cragin L, Laverdiere M, Garber G, Bow EJ, Scalera A etal. Economic evaluation of voriconazole for the treatment of candidemia in Canadian adults. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol 2008; 19: 219-226.
37. Bruynesteyn K, Gant V, McKenzie C, Pagliuca T, Poynton C, Kumar RN etal. A cost-effectiveness analysis of caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of suspected fungal infections in the United Kingdom. Eur J Haematol 2007; 78: 532-539.
38. Gagne JJ, Goldfarb NI. Candidemia in the in-patient setting: treatment options and economics. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2007; 8: 1643-1650.
39. Kuse E-R, Chetchotisakd P, da Cunha CA, Ruhnke M, Barrios C, Raghunadharao D etal. Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for candidaemia and invasive candidosis: a phase III randomised double-blind trial. Lancet 2007; 369: 1519-1527.
40. Petitti DB. Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000.
41. Gold M, Siegel J, Russell L, Weinstein M. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
42. Philips Z, Bojke L, Sculpher M, Claxton K, Golder S. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment. PharmacoEconomics 2006; 24: 355-371.
43. Sullivan W, Payne K. The appropriate elicitation of expert opinion in economic models: making expert data fit for purpose. PharmacoEconomics 2011; 29: 455-459.
44. Al-Badriyeh D, Liew D, Stewart K, Kong DC. Economic impact of caspofungin as compared with liposomal amphotericin B for empirical therapy in febrile neutropenia in Australia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 63: 1276-1285.
45. Al-Badriyeh D, Liew D, Stewart K, Kong DC. Cost-effectiveness evaluation of voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B as empirical therapy for febrile neutropenia in Australia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 63: 197-208.
46. Wenzel R, Del Favero A, Kibbler C, Rogers T, Rotstein C, Mauskopf J etal. Economic evaluation of voriconazole compared with conventional amphotericin B for the primary treatment of aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 55: 352-361.