{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03219814241486068, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01238390092879257, 'mean_word_length': 6.087719298245614, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost-effectiveness analysis of antifungal treatment for patients on chemotherapy.

Invasive fungal infections are fatal complications for patients on chemotherapy, and antifungal prophylactic treatment has been commonly recommended. Because its clinical and economic impact is not well known, we evaluated cost-effectiveness of anti-fungal treatment for patients who were neutropoenic as a result of chemotherapy. We constructed a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old patients with acute myelogenic leukemia to evaluate years of life survived (YLS), costs (US$), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (US$/YLS). The following treatment strategies for fungal infections were compared: (1) prophylactic fluconazole strategy: oral fluconazole administration concurrently with chemotherapy; (2) empirical amphotericin B strategy: empirical intravenous amphotericin B administration at the point where fever is detected; and (3) no prophylaxis strategy: intravenous micafangin administration at the point where fungal infections is diagnosed. Baseline analyses showed that prophylactic fluconazole strategy involved higher costs but also longer YLSs (25,900 US$ and 24.08 YLS). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of prophylactic fluconazole strategy was 625 US$/YLS compared to no prophylaxis strategy, and 652 US$/YLS compared to empirical amphotericin B strategy. Baseline result was found to be robust through sensitivity analyses. Our study showed that concurrent administration of oral fluconazole during induction chemotherapy appears to ensure clinical benefits together with acceptable cost-effectiveness.