NICE publishes draft guidance on two prostate cancer treatments

NICE has issued draft guidance for enzalutamide and abiraterone as treatment options for prostate cancer.

NICE has issued final draft guidance recommending enzalutamide (marketed as Xtandi by Astellas Pharma) for prostate cancer which has spread in people whose first treatment has failed, who have no or mild symptoms, and for whom chemotherapy is not yet clinically indicated.

The Appraisal Committee concluded that enzalutamide is a well-tolerated treatment that delays chemotherapy (which it recognised as being valuable to patients) and improves survival. It was also found to be cost-effective.

The final draft guidance for enzalutamide is now with consultees, who have the opportunity to appeal against it. Until NICE issues final guidance, NHS bodies should make decisions locally on the funding of specific treatments.

NICE is also consulting on preliminary recommendations that do not support the use of abiraterone (marketed as Zytiga by Janssen) for the same place in the treatment pathway, that is for prostate cancer which has spread in people whose first treatment has failed, who have no or mild symptoms, and for whom chemotherapy is not yet clinically indicated. The Appraisal Committee recognised that abiraterone is a well-tolerated treatment , which delayed chemotherapy but it was not convinced that the uncertain evidence for the long-term benefit of abiraterone justified accepting estimates of cost-effectiveness that were significantly above what it would normally consider acceptable.

Consultees, including the company, healthcare professionals and members of the public are now able to comment on the preliminary recommendations for abiraterone which are available for public consultation. Comments received during this consultation will be fully considered by the Committee.

Commenting on the draft guidance, Sir Andrew Dillon, NICE chief executive, said: "In this final draft guidance we recommend enzalutamide as a treatment for patients whose prostate cancer has relapsed, but for whom chemotherapy is not yet clinically indicated. There are very few treatments available for patients at this stage of prostate cancer, so this is very good news."

"The evidence submitted for abiraterone was uncertain in terms of the extent of the quality of life and survival benefit. In addition, its current cost does not appear to justify its advantages, to patients, over current standard treatment. It is obviously disappointing not to be able to recommend at this point."

 

Notes to Editors

Explanation of terms

  1. Enzalutamide is recommended, within its marketing authorisation, as an option for treating metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer in people who have no or mild symptoms after androgen deprivation therapy has failed, and before chemotherapy is indicated, and only when the company provides it with the discount agreed in the patient access scheme
  2. Abiraterone is provisionally not recommended within its marketing authorisation for treating metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer in people who have no or mild symptoms after androgen deprivation therapy has failed and in whom chemotherapy is not yet clinically indicated.

 About the draft guidance

  1. The Committee heard from clinical specialists that, when cytotoxic chemotherapy is indicated, most people would have docetaxel. But, when people have no or mild symptoms, to delay chemotherapy and its adverse      effects, clinicians may instead offer best supportive care including corticosteroids such as prednisolone or dexamethasone.

Enzalutamide

  1. The Committee concluded that enzalutamide compared with placebo      extended the time to progression, but how much it extended life was      uncertain because, in the trial, life extending treatments were used later      on in the treatment pathway that would not be available in the NHS.
  2. The cost per QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Year) gained estimated by      the company was £27,000. The ERG presented an 'exploratory base case' of      £31,600 per QALY gained. The ERG and company base cases accounted for the      effect of treatments received later on in the treatment pathway that would      not be available in the NHS, using the IPCW method. The ERG explored a      different method to account for this (2-stage method) which resulted in an      ICER of £34,500.
  3. The Committee agreed that, between the methods used to account for      treatments that would not be available in the NHS, the IPCW method applied      fewer assumptions and was more plausible. The Committee agreed that      enzalutamide was innovative, and recognised that there were benefits that      were not captured in the modelling, such as the value to patients in      delaying chemotherapy, that would reduce the ICER to a level that would be      considered cost effective.
  4. Enzalutamide costs £2734.67 for 1 pack of 112 x 40 mg      capsules. The manufacturer of enzalutamide has agreed a patient access scheme      with the Department of Health. This scheme provides a simple discount to      the price listed above, with the discount applied at the point of purchase      or invoice. The level of the discount is commercial in confidence.

 Abiraterone

  1. The Committee concluded that abiraterone compared with placebo      extended the time to progression, but it how much it extended life was      uncertain.
  2. The cost per QALY gained estimated by the company was £28,600. The      ERG presented an 'exploratory base case' of £35,500 per QALY gained.      Additional ERG sensitivity analyses to explore the uncertainty of the long      term benefits of abiraterone, and to use the intention to treat population      in the model, resulted in ICERs of up to £59,600 per QALY gained.
  3. The Committee did not feel the company's base case of £28,600 was      plausible for 2 main reasons. Firstly, because it was likely to      overestimate survival and quality of life gain with abiraterone. Secondly      because it was based on a population that was selected for having      covariate data, rather than using the full trial population.
  4. The Committee considered the ICER for abiraterone compared with      best supportive care was between £35,500 and £59,600. The Committee agreed      that abiraterone was innovative, and recognized that there were benefits      that were not captured in the modelling, such as the value to patients in      delaying chemotherapy. However, even taking into account these benefits      the cost-effectiveness estimates were above the range considered an      acceptable use of NHS resources.
  5. The list price of abiraterone is £2930 for 120 tablets (excluding      VAT; British national formulary [BNF], accessed online November 2015). In      its submission, the company proposed to reduce the list price to £2300 for      120 tablets, if abiraterone was recommended for this indication. The      company also proposed a complex patient access scheme for which the NHS      would pay the new list price for abiraterone for the first 10 months of      treatment. After 10 months, the Company would rebate the cost of any      subsequent tablets prescribed.  The      Committee recognished that this patient access scheme meant the cost of      abiraterone to the NHS was relatively certain.

About NICE

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is the independent body responsible for driving improvement and excellence in the health and social care system. We develop guidance, standards and information on high-quality health and social care. We also advise on ways to promote healthy living and prevent ill health.

Our aim is to help practitioners deliver the best possible care and give people the most effective treatments, which are based on the most up-to-date evidence and provide value for money, in order to reduce inequalities and variation.

Our products and resources are produced for the NHS, local authorities, care providers, charities, and anyone who has a responsibility for commissioning or providing healthcare, public health or social care services.

To find out more about what we do, visit our website:www.nice.org.uk and follow us on Twitter: @NICEComms.

 

Suggested Articles

A Missouri jury in 2017 ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $110 million to plaintiff Lois Slemp, but now the verdict has been overturned.

Gilead Sciences has found a new chief financial officer in an appointment that has mergers and acquisitions written all over it.

Pfizer's role as the hero in ramping up production of a chemo drug badly needed by pediatric oncologists is a turnabout for the drugmaker.