Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) as empirical treatment comparing to ceftolozane/tazobactam and to meropenem for complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI)

Table 1 Baseline pathogens and resistance rate for each treatment sequence

Pathogens	Frequency of baseline pathogens^a	Resistance rate by pathogens
Pathogens	Frequency of baseline pathogens^a	CAZ-AVI + metronidazole^b	Ceftolozane/Tazobactam + metronidazole^b	Meropenem^b
Escherichia coli	81%	1%	0%^c	1%
Streptococcus anginosus group	15%	0%^c	0%^c	0%^c
Klebsiella pneumoniae	13%	1%	52%^d	52%
Bacteroides fragilis	12%	0%^c	0%^c	0%^c
Pseudomonas aeruginosa	11%	7%	7%^e	24%

CAZ-AVI = ceftazidime-avibactam.
^aFive most frequently identified baseline pathogens in the RECLAIM study
^b2017 resistance data for Italy, calculated from forecast model [17, 20], and expert opinion
^cAssumption, due to lack of evidence
^dGiven that ceftolozane/tazobactam has no coverage for K. pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC), the base case was assumed using the resistance rate of K. pneumoniae to carbapenems
^eExpert opinion

ISSN: 2047-2994