z-logo
Premium
Pharmacoeconomic assessment of therapy for invasive aspergillosis
Author(s) -
Luong MeLinh,
Husain Shahid,
Rotstein Coleman
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
mycoses
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.13
H-Index - 69
eISSN - 1439-0507
pISSN - 0933-7407
DOI - 10.1111/myc.12036
Subject(s) - voriconazole , caspofungin , posaconazole , aspergillosis , intensive care medicine , medicine , antifungal , empiric therapy , amphotericin b , cost effectiveness , immunology , dermatology , pathology , risk analysis (engineering) , alternative medicine
Summary Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised hosts. Economic expenditures prompted by this invasive fungal infection (IFI) are significant. Although, the duration and associated costs of hospitalization comprise the largest proportion of costs in large surveillance studies, the newer oral antifungal agents may impact significantly on these costs. A review of the pharmacoeconomic (PE) studies is provided focussing on primary therapy, salvage therapy, empiric therapy and prophylaxis for IA. PE evaluations have demonstrated the cost effectiveness and dominance of voriconazole for targeted primary treatment of IA compared with other available agents. Differences in the drug choice and analytic methodology of the PE analyses of empiric antifungal strategy hamper definitive conclusions about the agents employed as empiric antifungal that may be directed at suspected IA although both caspofungin and voriconazole appear to be cost effective and dominant over liposomal amphotericin B (LAmB), whereas LAmB is more costly than conventional amphotericin B. Posaconazole is the most cost‐effective agent for antifungal prophylaxis against IFI and IA.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here