MDS
Haematology · 2011–2023
Every decision
| Medicine | Meeting | Outcome | Consumer input |
|---|---|---|---|
| lenalidomide Multiple myeloma (newly diagnosed, progressive, and relapsed/refractory) and myelodysplastic syndrome, in various monotherapy and combination regimens. | Nov 2023 | Recommended with restriction | input received Rare Cancers Australia |
| decitabine + cedazuridine Treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) classified as intermediate-2 or high-risk according to the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and… | Mar 2021 | Not recommended | input received Rare Cancers Australia |
| lenalidomide Initial and continuing treatment of patients with low or intermediate-1 risk myelodysplastic syndrome associated with deletion 5q cytogenetic abnormality who… | Jul 2011 | Not recommended | unclear |
| lenalidomide Initial and continuing treatment of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) classified as low or intermediate-1 risk with a deletion 5q cytogenetic… | Mar 2011 | Not recommended | no section in document |
Who spoke
Rare Cancers Australia
What the PBS pays
$90M in government benefit over 2024–25, across 56,242 services.
This is spend on the medicines considered for this condition, not spend on the disease. A medicine used for several conditions is counted in full under each, so figures across conditions add to more than national PBS expenditure.
| Medicine | Government benefit |
|---|---|
| lenalidomide | $78.7M |
| decitabine + cedazuridine | $11.7M |
Appraised elsewhere
NICE, in England and Wales, has appraised 1 technology for this condition, recommending 0 . A different committee, a different population and a different price: this is what has been looked at there, not a verdict on what happened here.
| Technology | Appraisal | Outcome | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| luspaterceptLuspatercept for treating anaemia caused by myelodysplastic syndromes (terminated appraisal) | TA844 | terminated | 2022-11 |
Conditions are classified by a language model from the indication text of each submission, so an individual label here can be wrong. Consumer input is read from the document's own consumer comments section: 2 of 2 decisions since 2014 carried some. Silence means no comment reached the committee through that facility, not that nobody was affected. More on how this was built.