Cost-effectiveness of Preemptive Therapy Versus Prophylaxis in a Randomized Clinical Trial for the Prevention of Cytomegalovirus Disease in Seronegative Liver Transplant Recipients With Seropositive Donors
| Autor: | Nina Singh, Raymund R. Razonable, Marilyn M. Wagener, G. Marshall Lyon, Fernanda P. Silveira, Drew J. Winston, Ajit P. Limaye |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Microbiology (medical)
medicine.medical_specialty Cost effectiveness Total cost Cost-Benefit Analysis Congenital cytomegalovirus infection Cytomegalovirus Context (language use) Disease 030230 surgery Antiviral Agents law.invention 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Randomized controlled trial law Internal medicine medicine Humans Cytomegalovirus disease Online only Articles Ganciclovir health care economics and organizations business.industry Valganciclovir medicine.disease Transplant Recipients Liver Transplantation Infectious Diseases Cytomegalovirus Infections 030211 gastroenterology & hepatology business medicine.drug |
| Zdroj: | Clin Infect Dis |
| ISSN: | 1537-6591 1058-4838 |
| DOI: | 10.1093/cid/ciaa1051 |
| Popis: | Background The relative costs of preemptive therapy (PET) or prophylaxis for the prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in high-risk donor CMV-seropositive/recipient-seronegative (D+/R−) liver transplant recipients have not been assessed in the context of a randomized trial. Methods A decision tree model was constructed based on the probability of outcomes in a randomized controlled trial that compared valganciclovir as PET or prophylaxis for 100 days in 205 D+/R− liver transplant recipients. Itemized costs for each site were obtained from a federal cost transparency database. Total costs included costs of implementation of the strategy and CMV disease treatment-related costs. Net cost per patient was estimated from the decision tree for each strategy. Results PET was associated with a 10% lower absolute rate of CMV disease (9% vs 19%). The cost of treating a case of CMV disease in our patients was $88 190. Considering cost of implementation of strategy and treatment-related cost for CMV disease, the net cost-savings per patient associated with PET was $8707 compared to prophylaxis. PET remained cost-effective across a range of assumptions (varying costs of monitoring and treatment, and rates of disease). Conclusions PET is the dominant CMV prevention strategy in that it was associated with lower rates of CMV disease and lower overall costs compared to prophylaxis in D+/R− liver transplant recipients. Costs were driven primarily by more hospitalizations and higher CMV disease–associated costs due to delayed onset postprophylaxis disease in the prophylaxis group. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|