Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaborem for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae-Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (CRE-KPC) infections in the UK

Objective The study objective of this analysis was to determine the cost-effectiveness of vaborem (meropenem-vaborbactam) compared to the best available therapy (BAT) in adult patients with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae—Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (CRE-KPC) infections from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS). Methods A decision tree model was developed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis for Vaborem compared to BAT in CRE-KPC patients over a 5 year time horizon. The model structure for Vaborem simulated the clinical pathway of patients with a confirmed CRE-KPC infection. Model inputs for clinical effectiveness were sourced from the TANGO II trial, and published literature. Costs, resource use and utility values associated with CRE-KPC infections in the UK were sourced from the British National Formulary, NHS reference costs and published sources. Results Over a 5 year time horizon, Vaborem use increased total costs by £5165 and increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by 0.366, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £14,113 per QALY gained. The ICER was most sensitive to the probability of discharge to long-term care (LTC), the annual cost of LTC and the utility of discharge to home. At thresholds of £20,000/QALY and £30,000/QALY, the probability of Vaborem being cost-effective compared to BAT was 79.85% and 94.93%, respectively. Conclusion Due to a limited cost impact and increase in patient quality of life, vaborem can be considered as a cost-effective treatment option compared to BAT for adult patients with CRE-KPC infections in the UK.