Cost-Effectiveness of Serum Galactomannan Surveillance during Mould-Active Antifungal Prophylaxis

Serial galactomannan (GM) monitoring can aid the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis (IA) and optimise treatment decisions. However, widespread adoption of mould-active prophylaxis has reduced the incidence of IA and challenged its use. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis-biomarker strategies. A Markov model simulating high-risk patients undergoing routine GM surveillance with mould-active versus non-mould-active prophylaxis was constructed. The incremental cost for each additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over a lifetime horizon was calculated. In 40- and 60-year-old patients receiving mould-active prophylaxis coupled with routine GM surveillance, the total cost accrued was the lowest at SGD 11,227 (USD 8255) and SGD 9234 (USD 6790), respectively, along with higher QALYs gained (5.3272 and 1.1693). This strategy, being less costly and more effective, dominated mould-active prophylaxis with no GM monitoring or GM surveillance during non-mould-active prophylaxis. The prescription of empiric antifungal treatment was influential in the cost-effectiveness. When the GM test sensitivity was reduced from 80% to 30%, as might be anticipated with the use of mould-active prophylactic agents, the conclusion remained unchanged. The likelihood of GM surveillance with concurrent mould-active prophylaxis being cost-effective was 77%. Routine GM surveillance remained cost-effective during mould-active prophylaxis despite lower IA breakthroughs. Cost-saving from reduced empirical antifungal treatment was an important contributing factor.

Automated summary

The study found that combining mould-active prophylaxis with routine GM monitoring is more cost-effective and effective for treating invasive aspergillosis, reducing costs and increasing patients' QALYs gained. The use of empiric antifungal treatment has a significant impact on cost-effectiveness.