PURPOSE: In a randomized, double-blind, comparative, multicenter trial, liposomal amphotericin B was equivalent to conventional amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in febrile neutropenic patients, using a composite end point, but was more effective in reducing proven emergent fungal infections, infusion-related toxicities, and nephrotoxicity. The purpose of this study was to compare the pharmacoeconomics of liposomal versus conventional therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Itemized hospital billing data were collected on 414 patients from 19 of the 32 centers that participated in the trial. Hospital length of stay and costs from the first dose of study medication to the time of hospital discharge were assessed. RESULTS:Hospital costs from the time of first dose to discharge were significantly higher for all patients who received liposomal amphotericin B ($48,962 v $43,183; P =.022). However, hospital costs were highly sensitive to the cost of study medication ($39,648 v $43,048 when drug costs were not included; P =.416). Using decision analysis models and sensitivity analyses to vary the cost of study medications and the risk of nephrotoxicity, the break-even points for the cost of liposomal therapy were calculated to range from $72 to $87 per 50 mg for all patients and $83 to $112 per 50 mg in allogeneic bone marrow transplant patients. CONCLUSION: The cost of liposomal amphotericin B and patient risk for developing nephrotoxicity play large roles in determining whether liposomal amphotericin B is cost-effective as first-line empirical therapy in persistently febrile neutropenic patients.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: In a randomized, double-blind, comparative, multicenter trial, liposomal amphotericin B was equivalent to conventional amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in febrile neutropenicpatients, using a composite end point, but was more effective in reducing proven emergent fungal infections, infusion-related toxicities, and nephrotoxicity. The purpose of this study was to compare the pharmacoeconomics of liposomal versus conventional therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Itemized hospital billing data were collected on 414 patients from 19 of the 32 centers that participated in the trial. Hospital length of stay and costs from the first dose of study medication to the time of hospital discharge were assessed. RESULTS: Hospital costs from the time of first dose to discharge were significantly higher for all patients who received liposomal amphotericin B ($48,962 v $43,183; P =.022). However, hospital costs were highly sensitive to the cost of study medication ($39,648 v $43,048 when drug costs were not included; P =.416). Using decision analysis models and sensitivity analyses to vary the cost of study medications and the risk of nephrotoxicity, the break-even points for the cost of liposomal therapy were calculated to range from $72 to $87 per 50 mg for all patients and $83 to $112 per 50 mg in allogeneic bone marrow transplant patients. CONCLUSION: The cost of liposomal amphotericin B and patient risk for developing nephrotoxicity play large roles in determining whether liposomal amphotericin B is cost-effective as first-line empirical therapy in persistently febrile neutropenicpatients.
Authors: Corrado Girmenia; Giuseppe Cimino; Francesca Di Cristofano; Alessandra Micozzi; Giuseppe Gentile; Pietro Martino Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2005-03-09 Impact factor: 3.603