Skip to main content

Table 5 Scenario sensitivity analyses

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

Parameter

Evaluated parameter

ΔCosts (SEK)

ΔEffects (QALYs)

ICER (costs per QALY gained)

Mucormycosis prevalence

14%

59,191

0.72

81,464

Pathogen identification percentage

0%

64,793

0.34

189,966

100%

39,588

0.26

154,784

Second-line treatment drug costs

−50%

53,701

0.3

179,950

+ 50%

50,681

0.3

169,830

Percentage receiving second-line treatment

0%

42,361

0.3

141,952

Percentage requiring therapeutic drug monitoring

50% for isavuconazole and 75% for voriconazole/posaconazole

51,661

0.3

173,115

Percentage starting with IV formulation

100%

56,818

0.3

190,397

Life expectancy

−50%

52,191

0.17

310,924

+ 50%

52,191

0.40

130,484

  1. Δ, difference, ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, IV intravenous, QALY quality-adjusted life year, SEK Swedish krona