Clinical Utility and Cost Effectiveness of Long-Acting Lipoglycopeptides Used in Deep-Seated Infections among Patients with Social and Economic Barriers to Care

The use of long-acting lipoglycopeptides (LaLGPs) in serious, deep-seated infections is of increasing interest. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the economic and clinical utility of LaLGPs in patients requiring protracted antibiotic courses who are not ideal candidates for oral transition or outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). This is a retrospective, observational, matched cohort study of adult patients who received a LaLGP. Patients were matched 1:1 to those who received standard of care (SOC). Cost effectiveness was evaluated as total healthcare-related costs between groups. Clinical failure was a composite endpoint of mortality, recurrence, or need for extended antibiotics beyond planned course within 90 days of initial infection. There was no difference in clinical failure between the two cohorts (22% vs. 30%; p = 0.491). Six patients in the SOC cohort left against medical advice (AMA) prior to completing therapy. Among those who did not leave AMA, receipt of LaLGPs resulted in a decreased hospital length of stay by an average of 13.6 days. The average total healthcare-related cost of care was USD 295,589 in the LaLGP cohort compared to USD 326,089 in the SOC cohort (p = 0.282). Receipt of LaLGPs may be a beneficial treatment option for patients with deep-seated infections and socioeconomic factors who are not candidates for oral transition or OPAT.

Automated summary

This study evaluates the economic and clinical utility of long-acting lipoglycopeptides (LaLGPs) in patients requiring prolonged antibiotic treatment. Results suggest that LaLGPs may be a beneficial treatment option for patients with deep-seated infections and socioeconomic factors.