← The record

VorinostatZolinza

Recommended OncologyAuthority RequiredLater-line line 💬 consumer voice

Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in patients with relapsed or chemotherapy-refractory disease who are ineligible for stem cell transplantation and have received prior systemic chemotherapy.

3
Submissions
2 resub
2011–17
On the record
$75k–105k
ICER range
1 sourced ICER · 2011
Redacted
Cost basis
risk sharing

Decisions on record

3 decisions
  • Meeting Mar 2017 Recommended Relapsed or refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma
  • Meeting Nov 2016 Deferred Relapsed or refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma
  • Meeting Mar 2011 Not recommended Anti–cancer drug

Access path

3 submissions · public record
  1. TGA registered · Zolinza

    TGA label narrower than the PBS population

  2. Mar 2011
    Not recommended

    unacceptably high and uncertain cost-effectiveness ratios, limited and non-comparative clinical data, small…

  3. Nov 2016
    Deferred

    Comparator changed: palliative care (though PBAC considered best available…

  4. Mar 2017
    Recommended · restricted

    Evidence: Single-arm → Other

  5. PBS listing · Authority Required
RecommendedDeferredNot recommended

From the public summary

Verbatim · PSD text · may span indications
PBAC outcome
5.1 The PBAC recommended the Authority Required listing of vorinostat for the treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in the General Schedule.PSD · Mar 2017
5.2 The PBAC recommendation for listing was based on, among other matters, its assessment, as described above, that the cost-effectiveness of vorinostat would be acceptable at the price proposed in the submission.PSD · Mar 2017
Economic analysis
6.21 The resubmission provided a modelled cost-utility analysis, compared to trial-based cost per responder analysis in the previous submission. This approach was appropriate in the context of the condition, but is not substantiated by the clinical evidence presented in the resubmission.PSD · Nov 2016
Table 5: Summary of model structure and rationale Time horizon The maximum time horizon was based on the observed median survival of 88.2 months in responders in the Australian registry data. In that registry, survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses with a maximum of 10.8 years follow-up.PSD · Nov 2016
Clinical claim
4.4 Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) confirmed an ex-manufacturer price for vorinostat 100 mg x 120 of $'''''''''''''''''''''. This corresponds to a Dispensed Price for Maximum Quantity (DPMQ) of $'''''''''''', which was the same as the DPMQ proposed in the November 2016 submission.PSD · Mar 2017
4.5 At the price proposed in the 2011 submission for vorinostat and with a responder rate of 49% based on ≥ 25% decrease in the modified Severity-Weighted Assessment Tool (mSWAT), the cost per responder was $''''''''''''''''.PSD · Mar 2017
Consumer comments
6.2 The PBAC noted and welcomed the input from individuals (2) and an organisation (1) via the Consumer Comments facility on the PBS website. The comments noted support for availability of this drug and a hope for improved quality of life under treatment.PSD · Nov 2016
6.3 Representatives of the PBAC also met with Rare Cancers Australia prior to the PBAC meeting. The meeting covered the PBAC consideration of romidepsin for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) (Romidepsin PSD, November 2016 refers) and vorinostat for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).PSD · Nov 2016

Cost-effectiveness

1 sourced ICER · 2011

ICER values redacted throughout the document (indicated by '''''''''). Cost per responder calculated at prior pricing ($'''''''''''''''), but not in ICER format per QALY or LY.

the PBAC noted that no comparative analysis against either comparator was presented. PBAC · 2016
ICER uncertain ×2ICER / price too highEconomic model disputedSurrogate endpoint ×2No head-to-head trial ×2Indirect comparisonCost-effectiveness accepted

Decision context

PopulationPatients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma with relapsed or chemotherapy-refractory disease, who have received prior systemic chemotherapy and are ineligible for stem cell transplantation, intended for curative treatment.

Risk sharingPatient number cap with rebate mechanism: less than 10,000 patients in Year 1 (including grandfathered MSD EAP patients only in Year 1), with a 70% rebate for expenditure above the cap to address risk of use beyond progression or in other indications.

Submission history

3 entries
DecidedOutcomeComparatorICEREvidence
Mar 2017 Recommended · restricted Other · ORR
Nov 2016 Deferred no active therapy Single-arm · ORR
Mar 2011 Not recommended palliative care (though PBAC considered best available care/chemotherapy more appropriate) $75k–105k RCT | Single-arm · QoL | Surrogate

Consumer voice

Nov 2016

Two individuals and Rare Cancers Australia provided input supporting availability of vorinostat and romidepsin for treatment of relapsed/refractory T-cell lymphomas, highlighting limited treatment options, high toxicity of alternatives, profound quality-of-life impacts from physical manifestations, inequitable access due to high out-of-pocket costs, and good tolerability of these drugs.

There are currently limited treatment options for patients with relapsed or refractory PTCL and CTCL, and available treatment options have high toxicity. Consumer comments · PSD
quality of lifeunmet needaccess barriersout-of-pocket costside effectstreatment burden

Similar precedents

By decision profile

Regulatory · TGA

Label narrower than PBS population — PBAC restricts to chemotherapy-refractory disease, excludes stem cell transplant candidates, and prohibits concomitant systemic therapies; TGA label has no such exclusions.