Educational ICU Antimicrobial Stewardship model: the daily activities of the AMS team over a 10-month period.

The emergence of antibiotic resistance as a consequence of inappropriate use results in higher mortality rates and has become a major public health challenge worldwide. Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) aim to ensure proper use of antimicrobials and reduce health care costs. We assessed the impact of using a behavioral approach during a persuasive ASP on antibiotic appropriateness, consumption and costs. We conducted a prospective interventional cohort before-and-after study in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a 554-bed, university teaching hospital in Terni, Italy, 14 of which are located in the ICU. We describe a 10-month persuasive ASP intervention model used in a referral ICU with daily rounds. The aim of the study was to improve medication appropriateness through educational action and reduce the consumption of carbapenems and echinocandins by conducting post-prescription reviews, prescribing reviews and holding daily discussions with the ICU team. We analyzed the prescribing appropriateness of the ICU team in accordance with the decisions made by the Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) team to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing during the first five months and the last five months of the surveillance period. The results were expressed as the defined daily dose (DDD) per 100 occupied bed-days and costs. The data were compared with those previously obtained during the pre-educational period (the year before ASP implementation). Comparisons were made between the decisions taken to improve antimicrobial treatments administered during the first half of the surveillance period (March-July) and those administered during the second half (August-December). In all, 116 decisions were made from March to July while only 65 were made from August to December (p-value 0.00001). A significant reduction was observed in the consumption of carbapenems and echinocandins (11.15% and 25.62%, respectively). Total antibiotic cost savings amounted to 57,541.16 euros. The persuasive ASP strategy positively influenced the prescribing behavior of physicians, thus improving the appropriateness of antibiotic therapy and reducing antimicrobial consumption.

Cost-effectiveness of de-escalation from micafungin versus escalation from fluconazole for invasive candidiasis in China.

AIMS: Guidelines on treating invasive candidiasis recommend initial treatment with a broad-spectrum echinocandin (e.g. micafungin), then switching to fluconazole if isolates prove sensitive (de-escalation strategy). This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of de-escalation from micafungin vs escalation from fluconazole from a Chinese public payers perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cost-effectiveness was estimated using a decision analytic model, in which patients begin treatment with fluconazole 400 mg/day (escalation) or micafungin 100 mg/day (de-escalation). From Day 3, when susceptibility results are available, patients are treated with either fluconazole (if isolates are fluconazole-sensitive/dose-dependent) or micafungin (if isolates are resistant). The total duration of (appropriate) treatment is 14 days. Model inputs are early (Day 3) and end-of-treatment mortality rates, treatment success rates, and health resource utilization. Model outputs are costs of health resource utilization over 42 days, incremental cost per life-year, and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) over a lifetime horizon. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the de-escalation strategy was associated with longer survival and higher treatment success rates compared with escalation, at a lower overall cost (-¥1,154; -175 United States Dollars). Life-years and QALYs were also better with de-escalation. Thus, this strategy dominated the escalation strategy for all outcomes. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 99% of 10,000 simulations were below the very cost-effective threshold (1 × gross domestic product). LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of the study was the lack of real-world input data for clinical outcomes on treatment with micafungin in China; data from other countries were included in the model. CONCLUSION: A de-escalation strategy is cost-saving from the Chinese public health payer perspective compared with escalation. It improves outcomes and reduces costs to the health system by reducing hospitalization, due to an increase in the proportion of patients receiving appropriate treatment.

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of micafungin versus caspofungin as definitive therapy for candidaemia and invasive candidiasis (IC) in Turkey.

Micafungin was shown to be as efficacious as caspofungin in treating patients with candidaemia and invasive candidiasis (IC). However, it remains unknown if micafungin or caspofungin is a cost-effective definitive therapy for candidaemia and IC in Turkey. The present study aimed to determine the economic impact of using micafungin versus caspofungin for treatment of candidaemia and IC in the Turkish setting. A decision analytic model was constructed and was populated with data (i.e. transition probabilities, duration of initial antifungal treatment, reasons for treatment failure, percentage of patients who stepped down to oral fluconazole, and duration on oral fluconazole) obtained from a published randomised clinical trial. Cost inputs were derived from the latest Turkish resources while data that were not readily available in the literature were estimated by expert panels. One-way sensitivity analyses, threshold analyses, scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Caspofungin (€2693) incurred a lower total cost than micafungin (€4422), with a net cost saving of €1729 per treated patient. Drug acquisition cost was the main cost driver for both study arms. The model outcome was robust over wide variations (of ±100.0% from the base case value) for all input parameters except for micafungin drug cost and the duration of initial treatment with micafungin. Caspofungin appears to be a cost-saving option in treating candidaemia and IC from the Turkish hospital perspective.

Cost Effectiveness of Candida Polymerase Chain Reaction Detection and Empirical Antifungal Treatment among Patients with Suspected Fungal Peritonitis in the Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Mortality from intra-abdominal candidiasis in intensive care units (ICUs) is high. It takes many days for peritoneal-fluid fungal culture to become positive, and the recommended empirical antifungal therapy involves excessive costs. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) should produce results more rapidly than fungal culture. OBJECTIVES: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of the combination of several diagnostic and therapeutic strategies to manage Candida peritonitis in non-neutropenic adult patients in ICUs. METHODS: We constructed a decision tree model to evaluate the cost effectiveness. Cost and effectiveness were taken into account in a 1-year time horizon and from the French National Health Insurance perspective. Six strategies were compared: fluconazole or echinocandin as an empirical therapy, plus diagnosis by fungal culture or detection by PCR of all Candida species, or use of PCR to detect most fluconazole-resistant Candida species (i.e., Candida krusei and Candida glabrata). RESULTS: The use of fluconazole empirical treatment and PCR to detect all Candida species is more cost effective than using fluconazole empirical treatment without PCR (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €40,055/quality-adjusted life-year). Empirical treatment with echinocandin plus PCR to detect C. krusei and C. glabrata is the most effective strategy, but has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €93,776/quality-adjusted life-year. If the cost of echinocandin decreases, then strategies involving PCR plus empirical echinocandin become more cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Detection by PCR of all Candida species and of most fluconazole-resistant Candida species could improve the cost-effectiveness of fluconazole and echinocandin given to non-neutropenic patients with suspected peritoneal candidiasis in ICUs.

Choosing Optimal Antifungal Agents To Prevent Fungal Infections in Nonneutropenic Critically Ill Patients: Trial Sequential Analysis, Network Meta-analysis, and Pharmacoeconomic Analysis.

The use of antifungal interventions in critically ill patients prior to invasive fungal infection (IFI) being microbiologically confirmed and the preferred drug are still controversial. A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared untargeted antifungal treatments applied to nonneutropenic critically ill patients. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and proven IFI rates. A random-effects model was used with trial sequential analyses (TSA), a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to obtain indirect evidence, and a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision-analytic model was completed from the patient perspective over a lifetime horizon. In total, 19 RCTs involving 2,556 patients (7 interventions) were included. Untargeted antifungal treatment did not significantly decrease the incidence of all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] = 0.70 to 1.14), but it did reduce the incidence of proven IFI (OR = 0.45, 95%CI = 0.29 to 0.71) relative to placebo/no intervention. The TSA showed that there was sufficient evidence supporting these findings. In the NMA, the only significant difference found for both primary outcomes was between fluconazole and placebo/no intervention in preventing proven IFI (OR = 0.35, 95%CI = 0.19 to 0.65). Based on drug and hospital costs in China, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per life-year saved for fluconazole, caspofungin, and micafungin relative to placebo/no intervention corresponded to US$889, US$9,994, and US$10,351, respectively. Untargeted antifungal treatment significantly reduced proven IFI rates in nonneutropenic critically ill patients but with no mortality benefits relative to placebo/no intervention. Among the well-tolerated antifungals, fluconazole remains the only one that is effective for IFI prevention and significantly cheaper than echinocandins.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of anidulafungin vs fluconazole for the treatment of invasive candidiasis (IC) in Turkey.

Anidulafungin has been shown to be non-inferior to, and possibly more efficacious, than fluconazole in treating patients with invasive candidiasis (IC). This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of anidulafungin vs fluconazole for treatment of IC in the Turkish setting. A decision analytic model was constructed to depict downstream economic consequences of using anidulafungin or fluconazole for treatment of IC in the Turkish hospitals. Transition probabilities (ie treatment success, observed or indeterminate treatment failures) were obtained from a published randomised clinical trial. Cost inputs were from the latest Turkish resources. Data not available in the literature were estimated by expert panels. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model outcome. While anidulafungin [TL 17 171 (USD 4589)] incurred a higher total cost than fluconazole [TL 8233 (USD 2200) per treated patient, treatment with anidulafungin was estimated to save an additional 0.58 life-years, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of TL 15 410 (USD 4118) per life-years saved. Drug acquisition cost and hospitalisation were the main cost drivers for anidulafungin and fluconazole arms respectively. The model findings were robust over a wide range of input variables except for anidulafungin drug cost. Anidulafungin appears to be a cost-effective therapy in treating IC from the Turkish hospital perspective.

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of antifungal therapy for primary treatment of invasive candidiasis caused by Candida albicans and non-albicans Candida species.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness studies of echinocandins for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, including candidemia, are rare in Asia. No study has determined whether echinocandins are cost-effective for both Candida albicans and non-albicans Candida species. There have been no economic evaluations that compare non-echinocandins with the three available echinocandins. This study was aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of individual echinocandins, namely caspofungin, micafungin, and anidulafungin, versus non-echinocandins for C. albicans and non-albicans Candida species, respectively. METHODS: A decision tree model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of echinocandins and non-echinocandins for invasive candidiasis. The probability of treatment success, mortality rate, and adverse drug events were extracted from published clinical trials. The cost variables (i.e., drug acquisition) were based on Taiwan's healthcare system from the perspective of a medical payer. One-way sensitivity analyses and probability sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: For treating invasive candidiasis (all species), as compared to fluconazole, micafungin and caspofungin are dominated (less effective, more expensive), whereas anidulafungin is cost-effective (more effective, more expensive), costing US$3666.09 for each life-year gained, which was below the implicit threshold of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in Taiwan. For C. albicans, echinocandins are cost-saving as compared to non-echinocandins. For non-albicans Candida species, echinocandins are cost-effective as compared to non-echinocandins, costing US$652 for each life-year gained. The results were robust over a wide range of sensitivity analyses and were most sensitive to the clinical efficacy of antifungal treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Echinocandins, especially anidulafungin, appear to be cost-effective for invasive candidiasis caused by C. albicans and non-albicans Candida species in Taiwan.

Assessment of high-priced systemic antifungal prescriptions.

OBJECTIVES: To assess compliance with international guidelines for costly antifungal prescriptions and to compare these results with a first study performed in 2007. METHODS: Retrospective study including all costly antifungal prescriptions made in surgical and medical intensive care units and in a hepatobiliary, pancreatic, and digestive surgery unit. Prescriptions were assessed in terms of indication, dosage, and antifungal de-escalation. RESULTS: Seventy-four treatments were analyzed. Treatments were prescribed for prophylactic (1%), empirical (22%), pre-emptive (16%), or targeted therapy (61%). Caspofungin accounted for 68% of prescriptions, followed by voriconazole (20%) and liposomal amphotericin B (12%). Indication was appropriate in 91%, debatable in 1%, and inappropriate in 8%. Dosage was appropriate in 69%, debatable in 8%, and inappropriate in 23%. Prescriptions were inappropriate for the following reasons: lack of dosage adjustment in light of the hepatic function (10 cases), underdosage or excessive dosage by>25% of the recommended dose in seven cases. De-escalation to fluconazole was implemented in 40% of patients presenting with a fluconazole-susceptible candidiasis. CONCLUSION: The overall incidence of appropriate use was higher in 2012 compared with 2007 (62% and 37% respectively, P=0.004). Nevertheless, costly antifungal prescriptions need to be optimized in particular for empirical therapy, dosage adjustment, and potential de-escalation to fluconazole.

Micafungin versus anidulafungin in critically ill patients with invasive candidiasis: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: In critically ill patients the incidence of invasive fungal infections caused by Candida spp. has increased remarkably. Echinocandins are recommended as initial treatment for invasive fungal infections. The safety and efficacy of micafungin compared to caspofungin is similar, but no comparison is made between anidulafungin and micafungin concerning safety and efficacy. We therefore performed a retrospective study to assess these aspects in critically ill patients with invasive candidiasis. METHODS: All patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) with invasive candidiasis, who were only treated with anidulafungin or micafungin, between January 2012 and December 2014 were retrospectively included. Baseline demographic characteristics, infection characteristics and patient courses were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients received either anidulafungin (n = 30) or micafungin (n = 33) at the discretion of the attending intensivist. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups, suggesting similar risk for developing invasive candidiasis. Patients with invasive candidiasis and liver failure were more often treated with anidulafungin than micafungin. Response rates were similar for both groups. No difference was observed in 28-day mortality, but 90-day mortality was higher in patients on anidulafungin. Multivariable cox regression analysis showed that age and serum bilirubin were the best parameters for the prediction of 90-day mortality, whereas APACHE II, Candida score and antifungal therapy did not contribute (P > 0.05). None of the patients developed impaired liver function related to antifungal use and no differences were seen in prothrombin time, serum transaminases and bilirubin levels between the groups, after exclusion of patients with liver injury or failure. CONCLUSION: Micafungin can be safely and effectively used in critically ill patients with invasive candidiasis. The observed increased 90-day mortality with anidulafungin can be explained by intensivists unnecessarily avoiding micafungin in patients with liver injury and failure.

Cost-effectiveness of caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B in the treatment of systemic fungal infections: a systematic review of economic analyses.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of fungal infections in severely ill patients is a clinical and economic challenge worldwide. Liposomal amphotericin B and caspofungin are highly effective antifungal drugs; however, they are very expensive and health systems must select the drug that results in the best clinical outcomes and is economically feasible. AREAS COVERED: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Health Economic Evaluation Database, and Centre for Review and Dissemination to find complete economic evaluations that directly compared the two treatment strategies. Expert commentary: Because of the high cost, patients in developing countries experience difficulty accessing highly effective treatments. These data can subsidize a decision for an effective antifungal treatment with reduced costs from all perspectives.