Khoo Ai Leng, Zhao Ying Jiao, Tan Glorijoy Shi En, Teng Monica, Yap Jenny, Tambyah Paul Anantharajah, Ng Chin Hin, Lim Boon Peng, Chai Louis Yi Ann
Pharmacy and Therapeutics Office, Group Health Informatics, National Healthcare Group, Singapore 138543, Singapore.
Department of Infectious Diseases, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, National Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore 308442, Singapore.
J Fungi (Basel). 2021 May 26;7(6):417. doi: 10.3390/jof7060417.
Serial galactomannan (GM) monitoring can aid the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis (IA) and optimise treatment decisions. However, widespread adoption of mould-active prophylaxis has reduced the incidence of IA and challenged its use. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis-biomarker strategies. A Markov model simulating high-risk patients undergoing routine GM surveillance with mould-active versus non-mould-active prophylaxis was constructed. The incremental cost for each additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over a lifetime horizon was calculated. In 40- and 60-year-old patients receiving mould-active prophylaxis coupled with routine GM surveillance, the total cost accrued was the lowest at SGD 11,227 (USD 8255) and SGD 9234 (USD 6790), respectively, along with higher QALYs gained (5.3272 and 1.1693). This strategy, being less costly and more effective, dominated mould-active prophylaxis with no GM monitoring or GM surveillance during non-mould-active prophylaxis. The prescription of empiric antifungal treatment was influential in the cost-effectiveness. When the GM test sensitivity was reduced from 80% to 30%, as might be anticipated with the use of mould-active prophylactic agents, the conclusion remained unchanged. The likelihood of GM surveillance with concurrent mould-active prophylaxis being cost-effective was 77%. Routine GM surveillance remained cost-effective during mould-active prophylaxis despite lower IA breakthroughs. Cost-saving from reduced empirical antifungal treatment was an important contributing factor.
连续监测半乳甘露聚糖(GM)有助于侵袭性曲霉病(IA)的诊断并优化治疗决策。然而,广泛采用抗霉菌预防措施降低了IA的发病率,并对其应用提出了挑战。我们评估了预防-生物标志物策略的成本效益。构建了一个马尔可夫模型,模拟接受常规GM监测的高危患者采用抗霉菌与非抗霉菌预防措施的情况。计算了在整个生命周期内每增加一个质量调整生命年(QALY)所产生的增量成本。在接受抗霉菌预防措施并进行常规GM监测的40岁和60岁患者中,累计总成本分别最低,为11227新元(8255美元)和9234新元(6790美元),同时获得的QALY更高(5.3272和1.1693)。这种策略成本更低且更有效,优于不进行GM监测的抗霉菌预防措施或在非抗霉菌预防期间进行GM监测的措施。经验性抗真菌治疗的处方对成本效益有影响。当GM检测敏感性从80%降至30%时(这可能是使用抗霉菌预防药物时预期的情况),结论不变。同时进行抗霉菌预防措施的GM监测具有成本效益的可能性为77%。尽管IA突破性感染率较低,但在抗霉菌预防期间进行常规GM监测仍具有成本效益。减少经验性抗真菌治疗所节省的成本是一个重要的促成因素。