Cost-effectiveness analysis of isavuconazole versus voriconazole for the treatment of patients with possible invasive aspergillosis in Sweden

Table 1 Data sources for all-cause mortality at day 84

Treatment group	Invasive aspergillosis	Mucormycosis
Isavuconazole	29% (SECURE trial: Randomized controlled trial [11]^a)	43% (VITAL trial: Open-label study [12])
Voriconazole	29% (SECURE trial: Randomized controlled trial	Patients with delayed treatment^b: 83% (retrospective observational study [10]^c)
Voriconazole	29% (SECURE trial: Randomized controlled trial	No (effective) treatment^d: 96% (meta-analysis of untreated patients [27]^e)

L-AmB liposomal amphotericin B
^aAssumed to be the same for isavuconazole and voriconazole based on lack of significant difference in the SECURE trial
^bIn model: patients treated with voriconazole followed by L-AmB due to mucormycosis identification
^cAll-cause mortality at day 84 of patients with treatment delayed by more than 6 days
^dIn model: patients receiving voriconazole who remained undiagnosed
^eMeta-analysis based on retrospective reviews [30, 43] and Fungiscope™ database

ISSN: 1471-2334