Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 13, 2026
Histological Quantification to Determine Lung Fungal Burden in Experimental Aspergillosis
Published on: March 9, 2018
Preventing invasive aspergillosis in lung transplant recipients: A cost-utility analysis
Roni Bitterman1, Aida Glembocki2, Laura N Walti3
1Transplant Infectious Diseases, Ajmera Transplant Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Background:
Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in lung transplant recipients. While most centers use universal prophylaxis, others opt for pre-emptive treatment. The optimal prevention strategy remains uncertain.
Objective:
To evaluate the cost-utility of universal antifungal prophylaxis versus pre-emptive therapy for preventing IA during the first post-transplant year, from an Ontario healthcare payer perspective.
Methods:
A state transition model with a lifetime horizon was developed. Transition probabilities, utilities, and costs were sourced from the literature as well as individual patient data. The base-case analysis assumed a relative risk of IA of 0.61 (95% CI: 0.33 to1.12) with universal prophylaxis compared to pre-emptive therapy. Outcomes included cumulative IA risk, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Incremental net health benefit (INHB) was calculated using a cost-effectiveness threshold of C$50,000 per QALY. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 1.5%. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.
Results:
The lifetime IA risk was 15.6% with universal prophylaxis and 18.6% with pre-emptive therapy. Universal prophylaxis yielded more QALYs at higher cost, with an ICER of C$30,393 per QALY gained and an INHB of 0.03. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed universal prophylaxis was favored at cost-effectiveness thresholds above C$45,000, with considerable uncertainty in the C$35,000-C$45,000 range.
Interpretation:
Universal prophylaxis was the preferred strategy in the base-case scenario, with an ICER below the commonly accepted threshold of C$50,000 per QALY. However, results were sensitive to model inputs, emphasizing the need for robust clinical trials directly comparing these strategies.
