Skip to main content
. 2013 Oct;57(10):4664–4672. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00723-13

Table 5.

Proportional costs of both approaches to manage persistent febrile neutropenia in a hematological patient

Therapy outcomea DDAT approachb
Standard approachc
Proportion (%) Cost (€)/patient Weighted cost (€) Proportion (%) Cost (€)/patient Weighted cost (€)
Overall successful response 36.5 8,309 3,033 33.9 11,692 3,964
    Successful response with EAT 17. 2 10,845 1,911 33.9 11,692 3,964
    Successful response without EAT 18.81 5,964 1,122
Overall failure response 63.5 13,976 8,875 66.1 20,915 13,825
    Failure response with EAT 43.57 17,635 7,683 66.1 20,915 13,825
        Death 12.9 10,288 1,327 9.04 11,726 1,060
        Breakthrough IFI 1.17 17,575 207 4.84 22,390 1,084
        Premature discontinuation 8.23 20,669 1,701 19.91 22,339 4,448
        Persistent fever 21.18 20,963 4,440 32.33 22,394 7,240
    Failure response without AT 19.98 5,964 1,191
Total cost per patient 11,910 17,789
a

EAT, empirical antifungal therapy; IFI, invasive fungal infection. “Failure response without EAT” refers to all cases of failure response without receiving empirical antifungal therapy were due to the fever not being resolved for at least 48 h before the neutropenia resolution.

b

That is, the DDAT approach recommended by the SAEI (12).

c

That is, the standard EAT approach recommended by the IDSA (4).