Suppr超能文献

氟康唑、泊沙康唑和伏立康唑用于接受首次巩固化疗的急性髓系白血病患者抗真菌预防的药物经济学评价。

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of fluconazole, posaconazole and voriconazole for antifungal prophylaxis in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia undergoing first consolidation chemotherapy.

机构信息

Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, 381 Royal Parade, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.

出版信息

J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013 Jul;68(7):1669-78. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt068. Epub 2013 Mar 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Fluconazole, posaconazole and voriconazole are used prophylactically in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). This study evaluated the clinical and economic outcomes of these agents when used in AML patients undergoing consolidation chemotherapy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review (2003-10) of AML patients receiving consolidation chemotherapy was performed. Patients were followed through their first cycle of consolidation chemotherapy. Antifungal prescribing patterns, clinical outcomes and resource consumptions were recorded. A decision analytical model was developed to depict the downstream consequences of using each antifungal agent, with success defined as completion of the designated course of initial antifungal prophylaxis without developing invasive fungal disease (IFD). Cost-effectiveness and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 106 consecutive patients were analysed. Baseline characteristics and predisposing factors for IFD were comparable between groups. Three IFDs (one proven, one probable and one suspected) occurred, all in the posaconazole group. Patients receiving posaconazole had the highest rate of intolerance requiring drug cessation (13% versus 7% in each of the fluconazole and voriconazole groups). Fluconazole conferred overall savings per patient of 26% over posaconazole and 13% over voriconazole. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated a mean cost saving with fluconazole of AU$8430 per patient (95% CI AU$5803-AU$11 054) versus posaconazole and AU$3681 per patient (95% CI AU$990-AU$6319) versus voriconazole. One-way sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to show that, in the setting of consolidation therapy for AML, fluconazole is the most cost-effective approach to antifungal prophylaxis compared with posaconazole or voriconazole.

摘要

背景

氟康唑、泊沙康唑和伏立康唑被用于接受急性髓细胞白血病(AML)巩固化疗的患者的预防性治疗。本研究评估了这些药物在 AML 患者接受巩固化疗时的临床和经济结局。

方法

对接受巩固化疗的 AML 患者进行了回顾性病历审查(2003-10 年)。患者在其第一个巩固化疗周期中接受了随访。记录了抗真菌药物的处方模式、临床结局和资源消耗。开发了一个决策分析模型,以描述使用每种抗真菌药物的下游后果,成功定义为完成指定疗程的初始抗真菌预防而未发生侵袭性真菌感染(IFD)。进行了成本效益和敏感性分析。

结果

共分析了 106 例连续患者。各组之间的基线特征和 IFD 的易患因素无差异。在泊沙康唑组中发生了 3 例 IFD(1 例确诊、1 例可能和 1 例疑似)。接受泊沙康唑治疗的患者出现不耐受需要停药的比例最高(13%,而氟康唑和伏立康唑组分别为 7%)。与泊沙康唑和伏立康唑相比,氟康唑使每位患者的总体节省分别为 26%和 13%。蒙特卡罗模拟表明,与泊沙康唑相比,氟康唑每位患者的平均节省费用为 8430 澳元(95%CI 5803-11054 澳元),与伏立康唑相比为 3681 澳元(95%CI 990-6319 澳元)。单因素敏感性分析证实了该模型的稳健性。

结论

这是第一项表明,在 AML 的巩固治疗中,与泊沙康唑或伏立康唑相比,氟康唑是预防真菌感染最具成本效益的方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验