Cost-effectiveness of posaconazole versus fluconazole for prevention of invasive fungal infections in U.S. patients with graft-versus-host disease.

PURPOSE: The results of a pharmacoeconomic study of the cost-effectiveness of posaconazole versus fluconazole in preventing invasive fungal infections (IFIs) in patients with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) are reported. METHODS: The results of a randomized clinical trial suggested that posaconazole may be as effective as fluconazole for the prevention of IFIs in recipients of allogeneic cell transplants who develop severe GVHD and that posaconazole may be superior to fluconazole in reducing IFI-related deaths. Using published data from that trial and data from secondary sources, an economic model was developed to estimate the costs, IFIs avoided, and life-years saved with posaconazole versus fluconazole therapy. The results of the modeled 112-day treatment simulation were extrapolated to a lifetime horizon. RESULTS: In the modeled simulation, posaconazole therapy was associated with a lower probability of IFI development (0.05 versus 0.09), increased discounted life-years (7.87 life-years versus 7.66 life-years), and higher discounted costs per patient ($8,860 versus $5,710 in 2006 U.S. dollars) relative to fluconazole therapy. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness of posaconazole versus fluconazole for IFI prophylaxis was $85,300 per IFI avoided and $15,300 per life-year saved. A sensitivity analysis indicated a 90% probability that the use of posaconazole for this purpose would be cost-effective at a threshold of $50,000 per life-year saved. CONCLUSION: Posaconazole is in the range of currently accepted criteria for cost- effectiveness relative to fluconazole for the prevention of IFIs among patients with GVHD.

Duke Scholars

Author John Robert Perfect Medicine, Infectious Diseases