ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2018
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.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe cost-effectiveness of posaconazole oral suspension versus fluconazole capsules for the prophylaxis of invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) in immunosuppressed allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients has already been proven. Now, a new solid oral tablet formulation for posaconazole has been developed with improved bioavailability, allowing a reduced daily dosage that can be taken independently of food intake. However, the efficacy of this new formulation should be evaluated since it is associated with a higher cost than the posaconazole oral suspension.
objectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of solid oral tablets of posaconazole versus fluconazole capsules for the prophylaxis of IFDs in allogeneic HSCT recipients with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in Spain. METHODOLOGY: A mathematical model comparing the efficacy and costs of posaconazole versus fluconazole was adapted to the Spanish National Healthcare System. Clinical data were obtained from the pivotal clinical trial of posaconazole oral suspension for allogeneic HSCT recipients, while pharmacological costs and use of resources were obtained from national sources. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA), as well as two alternative scenarios, were run to evaluate the robustness of the results under varying input values.
resultsPosaconazole tablets reduced the number of IFD events and enhanced overall survival, while maintaining a controlled budget. When compared to fluconazole, it was found to be a cost-effective alternative, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €13,193/life years gained. The PSA showed that posaconazole remained cost-effective in 74.6% of the cases, while alternatives scenarios yielded similar results as the base case.
conclusionsPosaconazole tablets are a cost-effective alternative to fluconazole and may show better results than the oral suspension formulation.
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.