← The record

Exenatide

Not recommended EndocrinologyAuthority RequiredSecond-line line 💬 consumer voice

Type 2 diabetes mellitus in patients with inadequate glycaemic control on metformin and/or a sulfonylurea, for use as second- or third-line therapy.

10
Submissions
6 resub
2007–19
On the record
$15k–45k
ICER range
3 sourced ICERs · 2007–2008
Cost-min
Cost basis

Decisions on record

11 decisions
  • Meeting Mar 2019 Not recommended Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)
  • Meeting Mar 2016 Recommended Type 2 diabetes mellitus (dual and triple therapy)
  • Meeting Jul 2015 Recommended Type 2 diabetes mellitus
  • Meeting Mar 2015 Recommended Type 2 diabetes mellitus
  • Meeting Nov 2013 Recommended 2 mg, power for injection, vial Bydureon® Bristol-Myers Squibb Australia Pty Ltd Major submission Type 2 diabetes Resubmission to request an Authority Required (STREAMLINED) listing for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes as: 1) Dual combination therapy with metformin or a sulfonylurea; and 2) Triple c
  • Meeting Jul 2013 Not recommended Type 2 diabetes no PSD
  • Meeting Nov 2011 Recommended Type 2 diabetes no PSD
  • Meeting Jul 2011 Not recommended Type 2 diabetes
3 earlier decisions
  • Jul 2010 Recommended Diabetes no PSD
  • Nov 2008 Recommended Type 2 Diabetes
  • Jul 2007 Not recommended Type 2 diabetes

Access path

10 submissions · public record
  1. Jul 2007
    Not recommended

    High and uncertain cost-effectiveness; ICER highly sensitive to disutility assumptions for weight gain; weight loss…

  2. Jul 2007
    Not recommended

    high and uncertain cost-effectiveness, concerns about non-inferiority to rosiglitazone, higher incidence of adverse…

  3. ↻ resubmitted
    Mar 2008
    Recommended

    Comparator changed: rosiglitazone and insulin glargine → insulin glargine

  4. Nov 2008
    Recommended · restricted
  5. Jul 2011
    Not recommended

    Comparator changed: insulin glargine → exenatide twice daily

  6. ↻ resubmitted
    Nov 2013
    Recommended · restricted

    Comparator changed: exenatide twice daily → exenatide 10mcg twice daily

  7. Mar 2015
    Recommended · restricted

    Comparator changed: exenatide 10mcg twice daily → insulin intensification using…

  8. Jul 2015
    Recommended · restricted

    Comparator changed: insulin intensification using rapid-acting or short-acting insulin…

  9. Mar 2016
    Recommended · restricted

    Evidence: RCT → Cost-minimisation

  10. Mar 2019
    Not recommended

    Comparator changed: exenatide 10 mcg twice daily → exenatide 2 mg once weekly dual…

RecommendedDeferredNot recommended

From the public summary

Verbatim · PSD text · may span indications
PBAC outcome
7.1 The PBAC did not recommend exenatide 2 mg once weekly autoinjector for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on the basis that the indirect treatment comparison (ITC) presented in the submission did not support the claim that exenatide autoinjector was non-inferior in effectiveness to the currently PBS-listed exenatide dual chamber pen (DCP).PSD · Mar 2019
7.2 The PBAC considered that the requested listing was appropriately aligned with exenatide DCP.PSD · Mar 2019
Economic analysis
6.24 The submission presented a cost-minimisation analysis of exenatide autoinjector versus the exenatide DCP. The result of the cost minimisation analysis is presented in Table 6.PSD · Mar 2019
Table 6: Results of the cost minimisation analysis Exenatide once weekly Exenatide once weekly DCP autoinjector Equi-effective dose 2 mg 2 mg Administration frequency Once weekly Once weekly Drug cost (pack of 4 injections) (DPMQ) $131.15 $131.15 Drug cost (pack of 4 injections) (AEMP) $111.44 $111.44a Drug cost (pack of 4 injections) (Effective AEMP) $''''''''''''' $''''''''''''''b Doses per year 52 52 Annual drug cost per patient $1448.72 $1,448.72 …PSD · Mar 2019
Clinical claim
6.20 The submission described exenatide 2mg once weekly autoinjector as non-inferior in terms of effectiveness and safety compared with exenatide 2mg once weekly DCP.PSD · Mar 2019
6.21 The therapeutic conclusion presented in the submission was not adequately supported by the evidence presented in the submission because the upper 95% confidence interval for the change from baseline in HbA1c per cent from the indirect comparison did not meet the non-inferiority margin of 0.4%.PSD · Mar 2019
Consumer comments
6.2 The PBAC noted and welcomed the input from an individual (1) and a health care professional (1) via the Consumer Comments facility on the PBS website. The comments described a range of benefits of treatment with exenatide once weekly including the acceptability to patients who are eager to avoid injectables, better compliance and fewer side effects.PSD · Jul 2015
Financial management – risk sharing
6.33 The sponsor sought a special pricing arrangement (SPA) for exenatide once weekly autoinjector at an effective ex-manufacturer price of $'''''''''', which is the same as current effective ex-manufacturer price for exenatide once weekly DCP. The sponsor advised that after the PBS listing of exenatide once weekly autoinjector, ''''''''''''''''' '''''''''' ''''''''''''''' '''''''' ''''''''''''' ''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''.PSD · Mar 2019

Cost-effectiveness

3 sourced ICERs · 2007–2008

Cost-minimisation analysis; no ICER calculated.

At its July 2015 meeting, the PBAC re-endorsed its November 2013 recommendation (of cost-minimisation basis with a partial cost offset for reduce needle use) and had recommended exenatide 2 mg once weekly presentation on the basis of potential health benefits from likely improved adherence by a small number of high clinical need populations. PBAC · 2016
ICER uncertain ×2ICER / price too highEconomic model disputed ×2Price cut / RSA neededSurrogate endpointCost-effectiveness accepted ×2

Decision context

PopulationPatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who have inadequate glycaemic control on metformin and/or a sulfonylurea, requiring additional therapy as second- or third-line treatment.

Submission history

10 entries
DecidedOutcomeComparatorICEREvidence
Mar 2019 Not recommended exenatide 2 mg once weekly dual chamber pen (exenatide DCP) RCT · Surrogate
Mar 2016 Recommended · restricted exenatide 10 mcg twice daily Cost-minimisation · Cost-minimisation
Jul 2015 Recommended · restricted exenatide 10 mcg twice daily RCT · HbA1c reduction
Mar 2015 Recommended · restricted insulin intensification using rapid-acting or short-acting insulin (basal-bolus regimen) RCT · HbA1c
Nov 2013 Recommended · restricted exenatide 10mcg twice daily RCT · HbA1c
Jul 2011 Not recommended exenatide twice daily RCT · HbA1c reduction
Nov 2008 Recommended · restricted insulin glargine RCT · HbA1c
Mar 2008 Recommended insulin glargine $15k–45k RCT · HbA1c
Jul 2007 Not recommended rosiglitazone and insulin glargine $15k–45k RCT · HbA1c
Jul 2007 Not recommended rosiglitazone and insulin glargine $15k–45k RCT · HbA1c

Clinical evidence

Trials cited in the PSDs · ClinicalTrials.gov
TrialPhaseNPrimary outcomeStatus
Study 108 (DURATION-5) Ph 3 254 Change in HbA1c From Baseline to Week 24 completed
LEAD-6 Ph 3 467 Change in Glycosylated A1c (HbA1c) at Week 26 completed

Consumer voice

Jul 2015

An individual and a healthcare professional submitted comments describing benefits of exenatide once weekly including better acceptability, improved compliance, and fewer side effects compared to twice-daily formulation, though the PBAC noted the efficacy claims were not fully supported by the submission data.

The comments described a range of benefits of treatment with exenatide once weekly including the acceptability to patients who are eager to avoid injectables, better compliance and fewer side effects. Consumer comments · PSD
treatment burdenside effectscomplianceacceptabilitytolerability

Similar precedents

By decision profile

Regulatory · TGA

Label narrower than PBS population — PBAC restricts to patients with inadequate control on metformin and/or sulfonylurea, requiring second- or third-line therapy; TGA label covers all type 2 diabetes without these restrictions.