Explore the vast range of titles available.

The treatment of visceral leishmaniasis (kala-azar) often requires prolonged therapy. In this open-label, randomized study involving more than 400 patients in Bihar, India, a single infusion of liposomal amphotericin B was noninferior to a regimen of 15 alternate-day infusions of conventional amphotericin B deoxycholate. In patients in Bihar, India, a single infusion of liposomal amphotericin B was noninferior to a regimen of 15 alternate-day infusions of conventional amphotericin B deoxycholate. Some 90% of patients with visceral leishmaniasis (kala-azar) in India and nearly 50% of patients worldwide live in the northeastern Indian state of Bihar. 1 In Bihar, treatment with liposomal amphotericin B is effective in regimens as brief as 5 days, 1 – 3 offering a remedy for the principal drawback of all other antileishmanial agents: a prolonged duration of treatment. 1 , 4 However, when such a regimen of liposomal amphotericin B was abbreviated still further, to a single infusion of 5 or 7.5 mg per kilogram of body weight, the efficacy of the drug (90 to 91% 4 – 6 ) did not reach the . . .

Background Cryptococcal meningitis (CM) is a major cause of mortality in HIV programmes in Africa despite increasing access to antiretroviral therapy (ART). Mortality is driven in part by limited availability of amphotericin-based treatment, drug-induced toxicities of amphotericin B deoxycholate and prolonged hospital admissions. A single, high-dose of liposomal amphotericin (L-AmB, Ambisome) on a fluconazole backbone has been reported as non-inferior to 14 days of standard dose L-AmB in reducing fungal burden. This trial examines whether single, high-dose L-AmB given with high-dose fluconazole and flucytosine is non-inferior to a seven-day course of amphotericin B deoxycholate plus flucytosine (the current World Health Organization [WHO] recommended treatment regimen). Methods An open-label phase III randomised controlled non-inferiority trial conducted in five countries in sub-Saharan Africa: Botswana, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe. The trial will compare CM induction therapy with (1) a single dose (10 mg/kg) of L-AmB given with 14 days of fluconazole (1200 mg/day) and flucytosine (100 mg/kg/day) to (2) seven days amphotericin B deoxycholate (1 mg/kg/day) given alongside seven days of flucytosine (100 mg/kg/day) followed by seven days of fluconazole (1200 mg/day). The primary endpoint is all-cause mortality at ten weeks with a non-inferiority margin of 10% and 90% power. Secondary endpoints are early fungicidal activity, proportion of grade III/IV adverse events, pharmacokinetic parameters and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic associations, health service costs, all-cause mortality within the first two and four weeks, all-cause mortality within the first ten weeks (superiority analysis) and rates of CM relapse, immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome and disability at ten weeks. A total of 850 patients aged ≥ 18 years with a first episode of HIV-associated CM will be enrolled (425 randomised to each arm). All patients will be followed for 16 weeks. All patients will receive consolidation therapy with fluconazole 800 mg/day to complete ten weeks of treatment, followed by fluconazole maintenance and ART as per local guidance. Discussion A safe, sustainable and easy to administer regimen of L-AmB that is non-inferior to seven days of daily amphotericin B deoxycholate therapy may reduce the number of adverse events seen in patients treated with amphotericin B deoxycholate and shorten hospital admissions, providing a highly favourable and implementable alternative to the current WHO recommended first-line treatment. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN72509687 . Registered on 13 July 2017.

IntroductionCryptococcal meningitis is responsible for around 15% of all HIV-related deaths globally. Conventional treatment courses with amphotericin B require prolonged hospitalisation and are associated with multiple toxicities and poor outcomes. A phase II study has shown that a single high dose of liposomal amphotericin may be comparable to standard treatment. We propose a phase III clinical endpoint trial comparing single, high-dose liposomal amphotericin with the WHO recommended first-line treatment at six sites across five counties. An economic analysis is essential to support wide-scale implementation.Methods and analysisCountry-specific economic evaluation tools will be developed across the five country settings. Details of patient and household out-of-pocket expenses and any catastrophic healthcare expenditure incurred will be collected via interviews from trial patients. Health service patient costs and related household expenditure in both arms will be compared over the trial period in a probabilistic approach, using Monte Carlo bootstrapping methods. Costing information and number of life-years survived will be used as the input to a decision-analytic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of a single, high-dose liposomal amphotericin to the standard treatment. In addition, these results will be compared with a historical cohort from another clinical trial.Ethics and disseminationThe AMBIsome Therapy Induction OptimisatioN (AMBITION) trial has been evaluated and approved by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, University of Botswana, Malawi National Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Mulago Hospital and Zimbabwe Medical Research Council research ethics committees. All participants will provide written informed consent or if lacking capacity will have consent provided by a proxy. The findings of this economic analysis, part of the AMBITION trial, will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and at international and country-level policy meetings.Trial registrationISRCTN 7250 9687; Pre-results.

Widespread antimony resistance renders conventional amphotericin B the only option for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in North Bihar, India. Because of its excellent safety profile, a large dose (7.5 mg/kg) of liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) was given to each of 203 patients with VL at 4 treatment centers, and the patients were discharged the next day. At initial clinical and parasitological follow-up, performed on day 30 after treatment, evidence of a cure was seen in 195 (96%) of 203 patients (95% CI, 92-98); 4 patients experienced treatment failure. Two patients were lost to follow-up, 2 died (one due to progressive disease and another, 5 months after treatment, due to an unrelated illness), and 12 experienced relapses during follow-up. Thus, 183 patients (90%; 95% CI, 85-94) had obtained final cure 6 months after treatment. Very few adverse events (fever with rigor, in 9.8% of patients) were seen. Single-dose L-AmB (7.5 mg/kg) treatment is safe and effective, and it may be used for the mass treatment of VL in India.

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the economic impact of micafungin (MICA) for treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidaemia (systemic Candida infections), a health economic analysis was conducted comparing MICA with liposomal amphotericin B (L-AMB). Research design and methods: The model was based on a phase III, randomised, double-blind, clinical trial which compared MICA with L-AMB. The model entailed a period of 14–20 weeks starting from initiation of treatment and was analysed from a German hospital perspective. Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were defined as the percentage of patients achieving clinical and mycological response after initial treatment and who were alive at the end of the study (EOS), and the total treatment-associated costs over the study period. Results: The health economic analysis shows that with MICA, 52.9 % of patients are successfully treated and were alive at EOS compared to 49.1 % for L-AMB. In addition, MICA has, on average, lower treatment-associated costs than L-AMB with [euro]43 243 and [euro]49 216 per patient, respectively. Because the costs are lower and the effectiveness is higher for MICA in comparison with L-AMB, MICA is more cost-effective than L-AMB. However, the results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis show that the differences cannot be considered significant due to a large variance, although MICA remained the most cost-effective option throughout the one-way sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: The lower costs and higher effectiveness reported for MICA versus L-AMB in this analysis indicate that MICA may be a more cost-effective therapy in the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidaemia when compared with L-AMB.

Background Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are associated with considerable expense and mortality on healthcare systems. There is a need to provide evidence of both clinical efficacy and value for money with any health technology. The current pharmacoeconomic evaluation investigated the use of liposomal amphotericin B (LAmB) and voriconazole for the empiric treatment of IFI in the Turkish setting. Methods Decision analytic modelling was used to create a pathway for patient treatment with a 5-point composite outcome measure. The data was obtained from a major non-inferiority multicentre randomised controlled study, with an expert panel of clinicians in Turkey providing transition probabilities and cost not available in the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed on the inputs from the clinical trial and the expert panel. Results As per the base case analysis, voriconazole was preferred by Turkish Lira (TL) 2,523 per patient treated and TL2,520 per surviving patient. LAmB was the preferred alternative by TL5,362 per successfully treated patient. Removing fever resolution as part of the composite outcome measure resulted in voriconazole being the preferred alternative per successfully treated patient. Univariate sensitivity analysis highlighted that increasing the duration of voriconazole by >1.2 days or decreasing LAmB by >1.0 days changes the result. Monte Carlo Simulation resulted in 69.4% of simulations favouring voriconazole per patient treated. Conclusion There is a strong likelihood that voriconazole is economically more favourable than LAmB in the empiric treatment of IFI in Turkey.

To evaluate the efficacy of a short course of a lipid formulation of amphotericin B (L-AmB) for the treatment of Mediterranean visceral leishmaniasis (VL), an open prospective study was conducted. Forty-one children with parasitologically confirmed leishmaniasis received L-AmB, 10 mg/kg daily for 2 days. The comparison groups were 30 children who, in a previous study, were treated with L-AmB, 4 mg/kg daily for 5 days, and 52 children who were treated with meglumine antimoniate. At 6 months after completion of treatment, overall treatment success was noted for 40 of 41 children treated with 2 doses of L-AmB, 27 of 30 children treated with 5 doses of L-AmB, and 47 of 52 children treated with meglumine antimoniate. Abatement of fever, reduction in spleen size, and correction of laboratory parameters occurred more quickly among the children who received 2 doses of L-AmB than among the comparison groups, and the total estimated cost of the 2-dose regimen was also lower than that of the other regimens. Two doses of L-AmB, 10 mg/kg each, is cost-effective therapy for Mediterranean VL in children.

As antifungal agents are frequently used in hematology and oncology, economic data on the empirical therapy of suspected systemic fungal infection are pivotal. Data were analyzed according to: (1) the rate of nephrotoxicity related to treatment with caspofungin in comparison to liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) from a randomized clinical trial, (2) the effect of nephrotoxicity on length of hospital stay from a European observational study, and (3) an example of total bottom-up cost in a department of hematology in Germany. All estimates include 95% confidence intervals (CI) using two-stage Monte Carlo simulation on binominal and Gaussian random variables from separate studies with comparable populations. Overall, 8.9 (95% CI 5.9–12.1) fewer patients (of 100 randomized) experienced worsening of renal function with caspofungin vs L-AmB, giving a number needed to treat for one patient to be harmed by L-AmB of 12 (95% CI 8–17). This was estimated to translate into 5.3 extra days in hospital (95% CI 1.6–9.1) per event or 0.48 days (95% CI 0.14–0.88) worth €298 (95% CI 89–554) per patient receiving L-AmB rather than caspofungin. From the hospital perspective, use of caspofungin was estimated to be cost-neutral compared to L-AmB at a per diem total hospital cost of €428 with, and €1284 without, consideration of supplementary reimbursement (Zusatzentgelt) of both L-AmB and caspofungin. The data presented in this scenario show that use of caspofungin in hematology–oncology departments in Germany results in shorter hospital stays and is at least cost-neutral compared to use of L-AmB.

In a randomized, comparative, clinical trial, caspofungin was found to be as effective as amphotericin B deoxycholate (ampho B) for treating candidemia (favorable outcomes in 71.7% and 62.8% of patients, respectively) and exhibited a generally better safety profile, particularly with respect to impaired renal function (IRF) (P = 0.02). The goal of this study was to examine whether cost savings generated from the reduced rates of IRF observed in the clinical trial would be enough to offset the higher acquisition cost of caspofungin relative to ampho B. We developed an economic model in which 100 hypothetical patients with candidemia were treated with caspofungin or ampho B. Rates of IRF and duration of drug therapy were taken from the clinical trial. Information on the cost of treating IRF was obtained through a search of MEDLINE using the terms amphotericin and cost, amphotericin and resource, amphotericin and hospital, and amphotericin and toxicity; and the medical subject headings kidney failure, acute/drug therapy; kidney failure, acute/epidemiology; kidney failure, acute/etiology; kidney/drug effects; cost of illness; costs and cost analysis; kidney failure, acute, and economics; and kidney failure, acute/economics. In addition, the Web site doctorfungus was searched for relevant references, and the Merck publication alert system was used. Antifungal drug costs were estimated using data from IMS Health. Costs were reported in year-2003 US dollars. In the base case, the model projected that using caspofungin instead of ampho B would result in substantially lower treatment costs for IRF, which would more than offset the higher drug acquisition cost (cost-offset percentage, 122%), leading to a net mean savings of $758.60 per patient. These results were not very sensitive to the difference in daily drug cost, but were sensitive to the mean cost attributable to treating IRF. As that varied, the cost-offset percentage varied from 61% (substantial cost offset) to 183% (cost savings). The results of this economic model suggest that, based only on differences in drug acquisition cost and renal toxicity, the use of caspofungin instead of ampho B in patients with candidemia may be a cost-saving strategy from the perspective of a hospital.

ABSTRACT Objective: To asses the cost-effectiveness of voriconazole in comparison to conventional amphotericin B and itraconazole for the treatment of invasive aspergillosis in the Netherlands. Methods: The cost-effectiveness of voriconazole in comparison to conventional amphotericin B or itraconazole was evaluated with a decision tree model followed by a life-time Markov model, focusing on long-term survival of patients treated for invasive aspergillosis. Efficacy after 12 weeks of treatment from clinical trials was used to estimate long-term effectiveness by extrapolating these short-term results over time. Information on medical resource consumption, treatment pathways and switch proportions were obtained from both the literature and Experts. Probabilistic analysis was used to compare the cost-effectiveness among the regimens. Results: With voriconazole, the mean cost for treating invasive aspergillosis per patient was €32 651 (2.5th percentile and 97.5th of uncertainty distribution: €30 037; €36 859), compared to €33 616 (€30 920; €39 633) for conventional amphotericin B and €29 115 (€23 537; €61 414) for itraconazole. The mean survival of patients treated with voriconazole was 174.0 life weeks (160.1; 188.8), compared to 116.1 life weeks (104.8; 128.0) for conventional amphotericin B and 150.4 life weeks (109.1; 194.4) for itraconazole. The beneficial effects of voriconazole on both cost and effectiveness compared with conventional amphotericin B resulted in a probability of 69.8% that voriconazole was a dominant treatment (i.e. less costs and longer survival). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of voriconazole versus itraconazole was €150 per life week (i.e. 7800 euros per life-year gained). Depending on the willingness to pay (WTP) the probability of being cost-effective vs. itraconazole increased to a maximum probability of 70%. Conclusion: In the treatment of invasive aspergillosis, voriconazole is dominant over amphotericin B and cost-effective in comparison to itraconazole.