← The record

CapivasertibTruqap

Recommended Oncology 💬 consumer voice

Treatment of locally advanced or metastatic hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer with a confirmed AKT pathway alteration (PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN) following recurrence or progression on or after aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy, with or without a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor.

1
Submissions
2024–24
On the record
ICER range
Cost basis

Decisions on record

2 decisions
  • Meeting Mar 2025 Recommended HR+/HER2- locally advanced unresectable or metastatic breast cancer with AKT pathway alteration no PSD
  • Meeting Nov 2024 Not recommended Hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced unresectable or metastatic breast cancer with AKT pathway alteration

Access path

1 submission · public record
  1. TGA registered · Truqap

    TGA label narrower than the PBS population

  2. Nov 2024
    Recommended · restricted

    vs fulvestrant monotherapy

  3. PBS listing
RecommendedDeferredNot recommended

From the public summary

Verbatim · PSD text · may span indications
PBAC outcome
7.1 The PBAC did not recommend capivasertib for treatment of hormone receptor positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) locally advanced unresectable or metastatic breast cancer with evidence of a serine/threonine protein kinase (AKT) pathway alteration, following recurrence or progression on or after endocrine therapy.PSD · Nov 2024
7.2 The primary reason for this outcome was due to the economic evaluation.PSD · Nov 2024
Economic analysis
6.51 The submission presented a modelled economic evaluation, based on the direct randomised trial, CAPItello-291, comparing the proposed test scenario (NGS tumour tissue testing for the detection of AKT pathway alterations [PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN]), with the comparator test scenario (no testing) in HR+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer patients who progressed on or after an ET with or without a CDK4/6 inhibitor.PSD · Nov 2024
6.52 Table 13 presents the summary of the economic model components.PSD · Nov 2024
Clinical claim
6.41 The submission described CAPI+FULV as superior in terms of PFS and inferior but with a manageable safety compared to placebo + FULV in patients with HR+/HER2- locally advanced (unresectable) or metastatic breast cancer following progression on or after an ET with or without a CDK4/6 inhibitor, who have an AKT pathway alteration (PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN).PSD · Nov 2024
6.42 The ESCs agreed with the commentary that the claim of superior PFS in AKT pathway altered patients was adequately supported. However, the treatment benefit of CAPI+FULV compared to placebo + FULV in CAPItello-291 may have reduced applicability to Australian clinical practice and any clinical benefit compared to SOC in the Australian setting was potentially overestimated because:PSD · Nov 2024
Consumer comments
6.2 The PBAC noted and welcomed the input from 3 organisations via the Consumer Comments facility on the PBS website. The input from Rare Cancers Australia described the impact of breast cancer on patients and the challenges of current treatments, including surgery, chemotherapy and hormone therapies.PSD · Nov 2024
6.3 The Medical Oncology Group of Australia (MOGA) also expressed its strong support for the capivasertib submission, categorising it as one of the therapies of “high priority for PBS listing” on the basis of the CAPItello-291 trial. The PBAC noted that the MOGA presented a European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) for capivasertib, which was limited to 3 (out of a maximum of 5, 13PSD · Nov 2024

Cost-effectiveness

ICER not stated in document. Economic analysis versus fulvestrant monotherapy was conducted but no numeric ICER value or band is presented in the PSD.

ICER uncertainEconomic model disputed

Decision context

Populationpatients with newly diagnosed locally advanced or progression to metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer

Submission history

1 entries
DecidedOutcomeComparatorICEREvidence
Nov 2024 Recommended · restricted fulvestrant monotherapy RCT · PFS

Clinical evidence

Trials cited in the PSDs · ClinicalTrials.gov
TrialPhaseNPrimary outcomeStatus
CAPItello-291 Ph 3 818 Progression Free Survival: Overall Population (Months) in the Global Cohort active not recruiting

Consumer voice

Nov 2024

Three organisations provided consumer input on capivasertib, highlighting the impact of breast cancer and treatment challenges. The input emphasised the benefits of oral treatment for quality of life, the significance of progression-free survival gains, and concerns about high costs limiting equitable access to treatment.

The advantage of capivasertib being an oral treatment, potentially allowing patients to return to a more normal daily life while receiving treatment. Consumer comments · PSD
quality of lifetreatment burdenunmet needout-of-pocket costaccess barrierssurvival benefit

Similar precedents

By decision profile

Regulatory · TGA

Label narrower than PBS population — PBAC restricts to confirmed AKT pathway alterations (PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN); TGA label has no biomarker requirement.