← The record

Ivabradine Hydrochloride

Not recommended CardiovascularAuthority Required (STREAMLINED)Later-line line

Treatment of chronic stable angina due to atherosclerotic coronary artery disease in patients with normal sinus rhythm, who are unable to tolerate or have a contraindication to other suitable PBS-listed drugs.

5
Submissions
1 resub
2007–09
On the record
$15k–75k
ICER range
5 sourced ICERs · 2007–2009
ICER stated
Cost basis

Decision on record

1 decision
  • Meeting Jul 2009 Not recommended Treatment of chronic stable angina due to atherosclerotic coronary artery disease in patients with normal sinus rhythm who are unable to tolerate or have a contraindication to the use of beta blockers.

Access path

5 submissions · public record
  1. Nov 2007
    Recommended

    Comparator changed: diltiazem (non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker) → Diltiazem…

  2. Nov 2007
    Recommended

    Comparator changed: diltiazem (non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker) → Diltiazem…

  3. Nov 2007
    Recommended

    Comparator changed: diltiazem (non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker) → Diltiazem…

  4. Jul 2008
    Not recommended

    incomplete evidence of comparative clinical effectiveness and safety with appropriate comparators, insufficient…

  5. ↻ resubmitted
    Jul 2009
    Recommended

    ICER dropped $75,000 → $45,000 (-40%)

  6. PBS listing · Authority Required (STREAMLINED)
RecommendedDeferredNot recommended

Cost-effectiveness

5 sourced ICERs · 2007–2009

Modelled economic evaluation with scenario analysis; ICER range stated in Pre-Sub-Committee Response.

The PBAC also remained concerned about the comparative toxicity of ivabradine and diltiazem, noting there are no direct comparative data on the toxicity profiles of the two drugs. Given its unique mechanism of action, ivabradine has a distinctly different toxicity profile to diltiazem and other anti-anginal agents, such that an assessment of relative toxicity concerns might best be considered through impact on quality of life. PBAC · 2008
ICER uncertainEconomic model disputed ×2No head-to-head trial

Decision context

Populationpatients with chronic stable angina due to atherosclerotic coronary artery disease, who also have left ventricular dysfunction (LVEF ≤40%) and a resting heart rate of 70 bpm or greater

Why it was knocked back

  • No evidence to directly support the restriction requested in the submission; relied on subgroup analysis of a post hoc subgroup; no evidence comparing ivabradine with perhexiline in patients refractory to all other anti-angina therapy; insufficient basis to recommend listing for either requested restriction

Submission history

5 entries
DecidedOutcomeComparatorICEREvidence
Jul 2009 Recommended placebo $15k–45k RCT · Other
Jul 2008 Not recommended diltiazem and amlodipine $15k–75k RCT, indirect comparison
Nov 2007 Recommended diltiazem (non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker) $45k–75k RCT · Other
Nov 2007 Recommended Diltiazem (main comparator); amlodipine (minor comparator) $45k–75k RCT
Nov 2007 Recommended diltiazem (non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker) $45k–75k RCT

Similar precedents

By decision profile