Trial reportPharmacoEconomics1999
Cost effectiveness of amphotericin B plus G-CSF compared with amphotericin B monotherapy. Treatment of presumed deep-seated fungal infection in neutropenic patients in the UK.
Trial report in PharmacoEconomics, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic evaluations of treatments for systemic fungal infections: a systematic review of the literature.PharmacoEconomics · 2004Pooled it
- Economic evaluations of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.PharmacoEconomics · 2003Pooled it
- Treatment options in Invasive Aspergillosis.Current treatment options in infectious diseases · 2014Article
- Therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors for established febrile neutropenia: effect on costs from a hospital perspective.PharmacoEconomics · 2007Article
- Secondary prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections with combination antifungal therapy and G-CSF-mobilized granulocyte transfusions in three children with hematological malignancies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2006Article
- Factors affecting UK primary-care costs of managing patients with asthma over 5 years.PharmacoEconomics · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the economic impact of adding granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to amphotericin B to treat a presumed deep-seated fungal infection in neutropenic patients. This study was conducted from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) hospital sector.
designWe used our previously reported trial as the clinical basis for the analysis (see Participants and interventions). These data were combined with resource utilisation data, enabling us to construct a decision tree model of the treatment paths attributable to managing patients in each arm of the trial. The model was used to calculate the cost effectiveness of using amphotericin B plus G-CSF compared to amphotericin B monotherapy in neutropenic patients with a presumed deep-seated fungal infection.
settingAn adult leukaemia/bone marrow transplant (BMT) unit in a large UK teaching hospital.
participantsPatients with a neutrophil count of < 0.5 x 10(9)/L and having a presumed deep-seated fungal infection after either chemotherapy or stem cell/bone marrow transplantation for haematological malignancy.
interventions29 patients received intravenous amphotericin B (1 mg/kg daily) plus subcutaneous G-CSF (3 to 5 micrograms/kg daily) and 30 patients received intravenous amphotericin B (1 mg/kg daily) monotherapy. The clinical trial showed that 62% of patients responded to antifungal treatment with amphotericin B plus G-CSF compared to 33% of patients who responded to amphotericin B monotherapy (p = 0.027). Nonresponders went on to receive a lipid formulation of amphotericin B. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE AND
resultsThe mean cost per patient treated with amphotericin B plus G-CSF was 11,247 Pounds and the corresponding cost for amphotericin B monotherapy was 14,317 Pounds (1996/1997 values)--a cost reduction of 3070 Pounds per patient. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the addition of G-CSF to conventional amphotericin B in the treatment of a presumed deep-seated fungal infection offers not only clinical benefits, but cost benefits which are robust to changes in clinical and economic parameters.
conclusionFrom a UK hospital perspective, amphotericin B plus G-CSF is cost effective compared with amphotericin B monotherapy in managing a presumed deep-seated fungal infection in neutropenic patients. This result should provide strong arguments to clinicians and policy-makers for the adoption of this treatment strategy in such patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.