Contenido principal del artículo
Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole (C/T+M) and ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) compared with 8 alternatives used in the treatment of complicated intraabdominal infection (cIAI) and complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) respectively.
Methods: A Monte Carlo simulation decision model was used for the estimation and comparison of treatment-related costs, and quality adjusted life years for patients with cIAI treated with C/T+M in comparison with cefepime + metronidazole, ciprofloxacin + metronidazole, doripenem, levofloxacin + metronidazole, meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam, ceftazidime + metronidazole or imipenem/cilastatin and patients with cUTI treated with C/T in comparison with cefepime, ciprofloxacin, doripenem, levofloxacin, meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam, ceftazidime or imipenem/cilastatin. Local costs were estimated using base cases identified by experts and consulting local databases. Sensitivity values of the PACTS (Program to Assess Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Susceptibility) study in Latin America were used in the model.
Results: C/T+M and C/T obtained incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) that were below the Colombian cost-effectiveness threshold (3 GDP per capita) in most comparisons, and were dominated by meropenem, considering only gram-negative microorganisms. Sensitivity assessments were also carried out, in which only the population with P. aeruginosa infections was considered, showing positive results for C/T+M and C/T (cost-effective or dominant with regards to all comparators).
Conclusions: C/T+M and C/T could be cost-effective alternatives in the treatment of CIAI and CUTI in Colombia, when there is an adequate and rational use of antibiotics. The results of the sensitivity analyses showed dominance and cost-effectiveness with regards to every comparator in patients infected with P. aeruginosa