Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41692914›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026

Healthcare resource utilization and costs of letermovir for cytomegalovirus-prophylaxis after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in a real-world, multi-centre study in Germany.

Marie Engelhard, Sebastian M Wingen-Heimann, Annika Y Classen, Igor-Wolfgang Blau, Gesine Bug, Corinna Hebermehl, Sabrina Kraus, Olaf Penack, Andrés R Rettig, Timo Schmitt and 6 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Marie Engelhard *Faculty of Medicine, Department I of Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-8450-7467
Sebastian M Wingen-Heimann *Institute of Translational Research, Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Annika Y ClassenFaculty of Medicine, Department I of Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Igor-Wolfgang BlauDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Tumorimmunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt- Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Gesine BugDepartment of Medicine 2, Goethe University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Corinna HebermehlDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Sabrina KrausDepartment of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Olaf PenackDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Tumorimmunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt- Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Andrés R RettigDepartment of Medicine I/Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Medical Centre, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Timo SchmittDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Torsten SteinbrunnDepartment of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Daniel TeschnerDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Maria J G T VehreschildDepartment of Internal Medicine, Infectious Diseases, Goethe University Frankfurt, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Claudia WehrDepartment of Medicine I/Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Medical Centre, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
J Janne VehreschildFaculty of Medicine, Department I of Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sina M PützDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Cologne, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. sina.puetz@uk-koeln.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesLetermovir has demonstrated efficacy and tolerability as prophylaxis against clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (csCMVi) in CMV-seropositive adult patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) compared to alternative antivirals. Despite these advantages, associated costs remain substantial. This study addresses the evidence gap by evaluating the health economic impact of CMV prophylaxis with letermovir in a real-world setting for alloHCT patients.

methodsThis retrospective, multi-centre case-control study was conducted at six German tertiary care centres. A micro-costing approach evaluated hospitalisation and anti-CMV drug acquisition costs over a 48-week follow-up period post-alloHCT. The analysis included patients surviving at least 100 days following alloHCT, comparing individuals receiving letermovir prophylaxis (cases) with those who did not (controls) between January 2018 and April 2021.

resultsThe incidence of csCMVi was significantly higher in the control than in the letermovir group (56%, n = 98 vs. 34%, n = 63, p < 0.001). Median hospital length of stay was significantly longer in the control group (45 days, IQR 36-66) compared to the letermovir group (39 days, IQR 32-55; p < 0.001). Hospitalisation costs were comparable (p = 0.865), while anti-CMV drug acquisition and overall direct treatment costs were significantly higher in the letermovir group (€21,844, 95% CI 19,247 - 25,107 vs. €7,711, 95% CI 12,692 - 25,107, p < 0.001; 81,871, 95% CI 76,721 - 87,021 vs. 67,161, 95% CI 61,693 - 72,629, p < 0.001). Besides letermovir, cost drivers post-alloHCT were rehospitalisation and csCMVi.

conclusionsOur study demonstrated higher anti-CMV drug acquisition costs and overall direct treatment costs in patients receiving letermovir prophylaxis compared to controls. However, these higher costs are accompanied by significantly improved clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

AcetatesAntiviral AgentsCytomegalovirus InfectionsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationQuinazolinesAdultCase-Control StudiesFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesAcetatesAntiviral AgentsletermovirQuinazolinesAllogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantationCytomegalovirusHealthcare resource utilization and costsLetermovirReal-world data

Identifiers

PMID41692914
PMCPMC13619717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.