ArticleBone marrow transplantation2010
Economic evaluation of posaconazole vs fluconazole in the prevention of invasive fungal infections in patients with GVHD following haematopoietic SCT.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mould-active compared with fluconazole prophylaxis to prevent invasive fungal diseases in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.British journal of cancer · 2012Pooled it
- A systematic review of oral fungal infections in patients receiving cancer therapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2010Pooled it
- Budget Impact of Microbial Cell-Free DNA Testing Using the KariusApplied health economics and health policy · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness of posaconazole tablets versus fluconazole as prophylaxis for invasive fungal diseases in patients with graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018Article
- Primary antifungal prophylaxis during curative-intent therapy for acute myeloid leukemia.Blood · 2015Review
- Pharmacologic and clinical evaluation of posaconazole.Expert review of clinical pharmacology · 2015Review
- Oral complications and management strategies for patients undergoing cancer therapy.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2014Review
- Posaconazole prophylaxis during front-line chemotherapy of acute myeloid leukemia: a single-center, real-life experience.Haematologica · 2012Article
- Posaconazole: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in the prophylaxis of invasive fungal disease in immunocompromised hosts.PharmacoEconomics · 2011Review
- Prevalence of invasive fungal disease in hematological patients at a tertiary university hospital in Singapore.BMC research notes · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Posaconazole has been proven to be as effective as fluconazole in the prevention of invasive fungal infections (IFI) in allogeneic haematopoietic SCT patients with GVHD. We assessed, from the perspective of the Spanish National Health Service, the cost-effectiveness of posaconazole vs fluconazole in preventing IFI. A decision-analytic model was developed to assess the average per patient treatment costs, IFIs avoided, life-years gained (LYG) and incremental cost per LYG for each prophylactic treatment used (in euros at 2007 prices). Patients are assumed to have received either posaconazole or fluconazole. The probabilities of IFI, IFI-related death and death from other causes were obtained from a single clinical trial. Long-term mortality and costs were estimated from secondary sources. Posaconazole was associated with fewer IFIs (5.3 vs 9%), increased LYG (8.01 vs 7.78) and higher IFI-related costs ([euro]11 585 vs [euro]6 959) per patient compared with fluconazole. The incremental cost-effectiveness of posaconazole vs fluconazole was estimated at [euro]20 246 per LYG. There was a 70% probability that posaconazole is cost-effective at a [euro]30 000 per LYG threshold. In conclusion, compared with fluconazole, posaconazole prophylaxis is a cost-effective strategy for the prevention of IFI in patients with GVHD.
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.