← The record

Retifanlimab

Recommended OncologyAuthority RequiredFirst-line line 💬 consumer voice

Treatment of inoperable locally recurrent or metastatic squamous cell anal carcinoma (SCAC) not previously treated with systemic chemotherapy, in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel.

4
Submissions
2025–26
On the record
$55k–95k
ICER range
3 sourced ICERs · 2025–2026
Redacted
Cost basis

Decisions on record

4 decisions
  • Meeting Mar 2026 Recommended Squamous cell anal carcinoma (SCAC) no PSD
  • Meeting Mar 2026 Recommended Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) no PSD
  • Meeting Nov 2025 Deferred Metastatic or recurrent locally advanced Merkel cell carcinoma not amenable to curative surgery or radiation
  • Meeting Nov 2025 Deferred Inoperable locally recurrent or metastatic squamous cell anal cancer with chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel), treatment-naïve

Access path

4 submissions · public record
  1. Nov 2025
    Deferred

    Comparator changed: avelumab → carboplatin and paclitaxel (CP)

  2. Nov 2025
    Deferred

    Comparator changed: avelumab → carboplatin and paclitaxel (CP)

  3. Mar 2026
    Recommended · restricted

    ICER dropped $95,000 → $75,000 (-21%)

  4. Mar 2026
    Recommended · restricted

    ICER dropped $95,000 → $75,000 (-21%)

  5. PBS listing · Authority Required
RecommendedDeferredNot recommended

From the public summary

Verbatim · PSD text · may span indications
PBAC outcome
7.1 The PBAC deferred making a recommendation for the listing of retifanlimab for the treatment of metastatic or recurrent, locally advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) not amenable to curative surgery or radiation. The PBAC was of a mind to recommend retifanlimab pending the provision of a positive TGA Delegate’s Overview. The PBAC 31 OFFICIALPSD · Mar 2026
7.2 The PBAC considered there is a small unmet clinical need for the first line treatment of metastatic MCC, noting there are currently other treatment options including avelumab and chemotherapy. The PBAC noted that the listing of retifanlimab may improve access for rural and regional patients given its less frequent and faster administration compared with avelumab.PSD · Mar 2026
Economic analysis
6.37 The submission presented a cost-utility analysis based on the results of the MAICs of POD1UM-201 (retifanlimab) and JM200 Part B (avelumab) to estimate the cost- 18 OFFICIALPSD · Mar 2026
6.38 However, the ESC considered the presented clinical evidence was insufficient to support a claim of superiority for retifanlimab versus avelumab, and therefore the presented cost-utility analysis was not reasonable or informative.PSD · Mar 2026
Clinical claim
6.31 The submission described retifanlimab as superior in terms of effectiveness compared to avelumab.PSD · Mar 2026
6.32 The ESC considered the claim of superior efficacy was not adequately supported by the clinical evidence presented in the submission as the results of the MAICs, particularly MAIC2, were highly uncertain and unreliable as differences which may not be treatment effect modifiers such as race were included, and likely biased in favour of retifanlimab.PSD · Mar 2026
Consumer comments
6.2 The PBAC noted and welcomed the input from individuals (4), health care professionals (7) and organisations (5) via the Consumer Comments facility on the PBS website. The PBAC noted the advice received from Rare Cancers Australia, NeuroEndocrine Cancer Australia, Melanoma & Skin Cancer Advocacy network, Melanoma and Skin Cancer Trials Limited clarifying the likely use of retifanlimab in clinical practice.PSD · Mar 2026
6.3 The Medical Oncology Group of Australia (MOGA) also expressed its strong support for the retifanlimab submission, categorising it as one of the therapies of “high priority for PBS listing” on the basis of an objective response rate (ORR) of 55% in the POD1UM-201 trial.PSD · Mar 2026

Cost-effectiveness

3 sourced ICERs · 2025–2026

ICER value redacted (shown as '&&&&' in the document); Special Pricing Arrangement applies.

Decision context

PopulationAdults with inoperable locally recurrent or metastatic squamous cell anal carcinoma (SCAC) not previously treated with systemic chemotherapy.

Submission history

4 entries
DecidedOutcomeComparatorICEREvidence
Mar 2026 Recommended · restricted avelumab $55k–75k Single-arm · ORR
Mar 2026 Recommended · restricted placebo + carboplatin and paclitaxel (CP) $75k–95k RCT · PFS
Nov 2025 Deferred avelumab — Single-arm · ORR
Nov 2025 Deferred carboplatin and paclitaxel (CP) $75k–95k RCT · PFS

Clinical evidence

Trials cited in the PSDs · ClinicalTrials.gov
TrialPhaseNPrimary outcomeStatus
POD1UM-201 Ph 2 107 Objective Response Rate (ORR) completed
POD1UM-303 Ph 3 308 Progression-free Survival (PFS) completed

Consumer voice

Nov 2025

Healthcare professionals and organisations, including people living with advanced small cell anal cancer, highlighted the clinical need for new therapies due to limited effectiveness of current chemotherapy and significant impacts on quality of life including pain, fatigue, infertility, and financial distress. Input described potential benefits of retifanlimab including improved response rates and

People living with recurrent/metastatic disease described significant impacts on quality of life, including pain, fatigue, premature menopause, infertility, financial distress, and stigma. Consumer comments · PSD
unmet needquality of lifetreatment burdensurvival benefitside effectsfinancial distress

Similar precedents

By decision profile

Regulatory · TGA

Label equal than PBS population — Both specify first-line treatment of inoperable locally recurrent or metastatic SCAC with carboplatin and paclitaxel in adults.