Teclistamab

7.1 The PBAC recommended teclistamab for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have received at least 3 prior lines of therapy, including a proteasome inhibitor (PI), an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD) and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, on the basis that it should be available only under special arrangements under the Section 100 (Efficient Funding of Chemotherapy – Related Benefits) and as a General Schedule …PSD · Mar 2026

7.2 The PBAC acknowledged the input received from individuals, health care professionals and organisations supporting the submission. The PBAC noted that the input highlighted the continued need for new and effective therapies for patients with RRMM. The PBAC noted the positive responses to treatment for patients who have accessed teclistamab via clinical trials and the substantial improvements that treatment offered to their quality of life.PSD · Mar 2026

6.44 The submission presented a CMA comparing teclistamab to elranatamab. This was consistent with the clinical claim of non-inferiority. Table 11 presents the summary of the CMA. 21 OFFICIALPSD · Mar 2026

OFFICIAL Public Summary Document - March 2026 PBAC Meeting Table 11: Key components and assumptions of the cost-minimisation approach Component Claim or assumption Based on the MAIC presented in the submission, teclistamab monotherapy is non-inferior in terms Therapeutic claim: of efficacy when compared to elranatamab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with TCE effectiveness RRMM in the 4L+ setting.PSD · Mar 2026

6.40 The submission described teclistamab as non-inferior in terms of effectiveness compared to elranatamab. The ESC considered that the claim of non-inferior effectiveness was uncertain, as: 20 OFFICIALPSD · Mar 2026

• The clinical effectiveness estimates derived from the unanchored MAIC were associated with limitations that undermined the robustness of the comparison. The selection of covariates used for the base case matching set appeared to be arbitrary and were not justified. Significantly more covariates could be matched as demonstrated by the full matching set, e.g. ECOG performance status.PSD · Mar 2026

6.79 The ESC noted that when recommending elranatamab in March 2025, the PBAC considered that, due to uncertainties with the financial estimates, a risk sharing arrangement (RSA) would be required. The ESC considered that if recommended, teclistamab should join the RSA for elranatamab. For more detail on PBAC’s view, see section 7 PBAC outcome.PSD · Mar 2026