RibociclibKisqali
Adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-), resected early breast cancer (eBC) at high risk of disease recurrence, in combination with endocrine therapy. Specifically for patients with Stage II or III disease with 1–3 positive axillary lymph nodes with grade ≤2 histology and tumour size <5 cm, or Stage IIB/III node-negative disease, or Stage IIA node-negative disease with grade 3 or grade 2 histology with positive molecular diagnostic outcome.
Decisions on record
- Meeting Jul 2025 Not recommended HR+/HER2- resected early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence
- Meeting Nov 2024 Recommended Hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer at high recurrence risk
- Meeting Nov 2020 Recommended Locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer
- Meeting Jul 2020 Deferred Breast cancer
- Meeting Mar 2018 Recommended Hormone receptor- positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative (HER2-) advanced or metastatic breast cancer
- Meeting Nov 2017 Not recommended Indicated in combination with an aromatase inhibitor for the treatment of men and postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) advanced or metastatic breast cancer, as an initial endocrine-based therapy.
- Meeting Jul 2017 Not recommended Hormone receptor- positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative (HER2-) advanced or metastatic breast cancer
Access path
- TGA registered · Kisqali
TGA label narrower than the PBS population
- Jul 2017Not recommended
vs letrozole alone; palbociclib plus letrozole (near market…
- Nov 2017Not recommended
Comparator changed: letrozole alone; palbociclib plus letrozole (near market comparator)…
- ↻ resubmittedMar 2018Recommended
ICER dropped $105,000 → $75,000 (-29%)
- Jul 2020Deferred
Comparator changed: letrozole alone → ribociclib plus non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors…
- Nov 2020Recommended · restricted
Comparator changed: ribociclib plus non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (first-line)…
- Nov 2024Recommended · restricted
Comparator changed: First-line: ribociclib plus non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors…
- Jul 2025Not recommended
Comparator changed: abemaciclib plus adjuvant endocrine therapy → adjuvant endocrine…
From the public summary
7.1 The PBAC did not recommend the listing of ribociclib, as combination therapy with adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), for the treatment of hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-), resected early breast cancer (eBC) with stage II or III disease with 1−3 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) meeting specific histological and tumour size criteria, stage IIB or III disease with no positive lymph nodes or …PSD · Jul 2025
In the context of the increase in the number of adverse events reported with the addition of ribociclib to ET, and that patients treated in the adjuvant setting forego treatment with a CDK4/6 in the metastatic setting, the PBAC considered the overall benefit associated with adding ribociclib to ET in node negative/low patients had not been demonstrated to be clinically meaningful.PSD · Jul 2025
6.33 The submission presented a stepped economic evaluation comparing adjuvant ribociclib plus ET with ET alone, based on a subgroup of patients in the NATALEE trial in line with the proposed PBS population. The key components of the economic evaluation are summarised in Table 9. 21 OFFICIALPSD · Jul 2025
OFFICIAL Public Summary Document – July 2025 PBAC Meeting Table 9: Summary of model structure, key inputs and rationale Component Description Treatments Adjuvant treatment with ribociclib + ET vs ET Time horizon 30 years in the base case versus a median follow-up of 49.6 months in the NATALEE trial Outcomes LYs and QALYs Methods used to Cohort expected value analysis (Markov model) generate results Health states 6 health states: iDF, NMR, remission, SPM, …PSD · Jul 2025
6.26 The submission described ribociclib plus adjuvant ET as superior in terms of effectiveness compared to adjuvant ET alone.PSD · Jul 2025
6.27 The ESC considered the claim was adequately supported for iDFS, however considered that the absolute benefit was modest. In the PBS subgroup of the NATALEE trial, treatment with ribociclib + ET, in comparison to ET alone, resulted in an absolute benefit of iDFS of 1.3% at 3 years and 3.7% at 4 years and an absolute benefit of DRFS of 1.3% at 3 years and 2.8% at 4 years.PSD · Jul 2025
6.5 The PBAC acknowledged the input from health professionals discussed the treatment of early breast cancer, which aims to reduce the risk of recurrence and increase the proportion of cured individuals. The input also noted the importance of ribociclib as an additional treatment option to reduce recurrence rates, whilst noting that ribociclib had side effects, but that they were usually able to be managed.PSD · Jul 2025
6.6 The PBAC also acknowledged the input from individuals who would like access to ribociclib but have not used the medicine. The input discussed the devastating impact of a breast cancer diagnosis and the difficult side effects associated with current treatments, including fatigue, pain, brain fog, mobility issues and significant emotional impacts. The input also described the fear and anxiety related to the risk of recurrence.PSD · Jul 2025
Cost-effectiveness
The submission was based on a cost-effectiveness analysis versus adjuvant ET alone, but no numeric ICER values are stated in the public text. The November 2024 PBAC consideration used a cost-minimisation analysis.
The PBAC also advised that revisions to the economic model were required and the second-line price for RIBO+FULV should be reduced so that the ICER is below $55,000 to < $75,000 per QALY (paragraph 7.18, ribociclib PSD, July 2020 PBAC Meeting). PBAC · 2020
Decision context
PopulationAdult patients with HR positive, HER2 negative early breast cancer with (a) stage II or III disease with 1–3 positive axillary lymph nodes with grade ≤2 histology and tumour size <5 cm, or (b) stage IIB or III node-negative disease, or (c) stage IIA node-negative disease with histological grade 3 or grade 2 with a positive molecular diagnostic outcome.
Submission history
| Decided | Outcome | Comparator | ICER | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2025 | Not recommended | adjuvant endocrine therapy alone | — | RCT · iDFS |
| Nov 2024 | Recommended · restricted | abemaciclib plus adjuvant endocrine therapy | — | RCT · iDFS |
| Nov 2020 | Recommended · restricted | First-line: ribociclib plus non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (RIBO+NSAI); Second-line: everolimus plus exemestane (EVE | $75k | RCT · PFS |
| Jul 2020 | Deferred | ribociclib plus non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (first-line); everolimus plus exemestane (second-line) | — | RCT · PFS |
| Mar 2018 | Recommended | letrozole alone | $45k–75k | RCT · PFS |
| Nov 2017 | Not recommended | letrozole alone (main comparator); palbociclib plus letrozole (near market comparator) | $75k–105k | RCT · PFS |
| Jul 2017 | Not recommended | letrozole alone; palbociclib plus letrozole (near market comparator) | — | RCT · PFS |
Clinical evidence
| Trial | Phase | N | Primary outcome | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MONALEESA-3 | Ph 3 | 726 | Progression Free Survival (PFS) Per Investigator Assessment | completed |
| MONALEESA-2 | Ph 3 | 668 | Progression Free Survival (PFS) by Investigator Assessment | completed |
| NATALEE | Ph 3 | 5,101 | Invasive Disease-Free Survival (iDFS) | active not recruiting |
| MONALEESA-1 | Ph 2 | 14 | Cell Cycle Response Rate Per Cell Proliferation Marker Ki67 | terminated |
Consumer voice
Consumer input from health professionals, individuals seeking access to ribociclib, and four consumer organisations (Rare Cancers Australia, BCNA, So Brave, Inherited Cancers Australia) emphasised the devastating impact of early breast cancer, burden of current treatment side effects, fear of recurrence, and support for ribociclib as an additional treatment option that could improve outcomes and q
the current cost of ribociclib was a barrier to treatment Consumer comments · PSD
Similar precedents
Regulatory · TGA
Label narrower than PBS population — PBAC restricts to specific nodal/grade/size combinations within Stage II–III, whereas TGA label covers all high-risk Stage II–III patients.