← The record

LurasidoneAPO-LURASIDONE

Recommended Mental healthAuthority RequiredSecond-line line

Treatment of schizophrenia in adults, particularly for patients not controlled satisfactorily or intolerant to other atypical antipsychotic agents, or in whom weight control and cardiometabolic issues are of concern.

1
Submissions
1 resub
2015–15
On the record
ICER range
Cost-min
Cost basis

Decision on record

1 decision
  • Meeting Mar 2015 Recommended Schizophrenia

Access path

1 submission · public record
  1. TGA registered · APO-LURASIDONE

    TGA label narrower than the PBS population

  2. Mar 2015
    Recommended · restricted

    vs ziprasidone and aripiprazole (mixed comparator)

  3. PBS listing · Authority Required
RecommendedDeferredNot recommended

From the public summary

Verbatim · PSD text · may span indications
PBAC outcome
7.1 The PBAC recommended the listing of lurasidone on the basis that it should be available as an Authority Required (STREAMLINED) listing on the General Schedule.PSD · Mar 2015
In making its recommendation, the PBAC considered that lurasidone should be cost- minimised to ziprasidone only.PSD · Mar 2015
Economic analysis
6.17 The submission presented a cost minimisation analysis against the mixedPSD · Mar 2015
Clinical claim
6.15 The resubmission described lurasidone as non-inferior in terms of comparative effectiveness and similar in terms of comparative safety over the main comparators ziprasidone and aripiprazole.PSD · Mar 2015
6.16 The indirect comparison showed the lurasidone 40mg and pooled doses (40mg and 80mg) are non-inferior to ziprasidone and aripiprazole, with the 95% CI within the MCID of 7 points on the PANSS total score. However, lurasidone 120mg did not show non-inferiority versus aripiprazole at 8 weeks or 28 weeks.PSD · Mar 2015

Cost-effectiveness

Cost-minimisation analysis; no ICER calculated. Submission based on equi-effective dosing and cost comparison.

Economic model disputed

Decision context

PopulationAdults with schizophrenia not controlled satisfactorily or intolerant to atypical antipsychotic agents such as olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone; or those in whom weight control and cardiometabolic issues are of concern.

Why it was knocked back

  • non-inferiority not established due to trial applicability concerns (acute vs maintenance settings, fixed vs flexible dosing), insufficient evidence of dose-response, concerns about exchangeability of indirect comparison trials, limitations in supporting a narrower second-line restriction that may not be implementable

Submission history

1 entries
DecidedOutcomeComparatorICEREvidence
Mar 2015 Recommended · restricted ziprasidone and aripiprazole (mixed comparator) Meta-analysis · PANSS

Similar precedents

By decision profile

Regulatory · TGA

Label narrower than PBS population — PBAC restricts to second-line use in treatment-resistant or intolerant patients, versus TGA's unrestricted adult schizophrenia label.