Cost-Effectiveness of Linezolid versus Vancomycin among Patients with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Confirmed Nosocomial Pneumonia in China

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of intravenous linezolid as a first-line agent against intravenous vancomycin in treating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus–confirmed nosocomial pneumonia in four Chinese cities.MethodsA decision-analytic model of 4-week time horizon was used to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses from the payer’s perspective. Clinical outcomes and resource use data were derived from a head-to-head trial, supplemented with local cost estimates based on hospital data via an expert panel. A series of scenario analyses were conducted to evaluate the impact of uncertainty around model inputs. All results were reported in 2012 Chinese Renminbi.ResultsThe predicted probability of overall treatment success was 0.629 and 0.602 for linezolid and vancomycin, respectively. Total inpatient costs varied across the four cities, ranging from ¥58,835 to ¥86,894 for linezolid and ¥58,390 to ¥87,033 for vancomycin, respectively. Linezolid was demonstrated to be a dominant treatment strategy in Guangzhou. In Beijing, Nanjing, and Xi’an, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in terms of additional successfully treated patient were ¥1,861, ¥163, and ¥16,509, respectively. Dominance by linezolid was observed in some scenario analyses with parameters such as treatment duration, inclusion of cost of managing adverse events, and drug acquisition costs being the main drivers of cost-effectiveness results.ConclusionsDespite linezolid’s higher drug acquisition cost, its superior clinical efficacy renders it a likely cost-effective alternative for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus–confirmed nosocomial pneumonia as compared with branded vancomycin from the payer perspectives of Beijing, Guangzhou, Nanjing, and Xi’an