Published in

Cambridge University Press, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 3(36), p. 224-231, 2020

DOI: 10.1017/s026646232000029x

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Analysis of PBAC submissions and outcomes for medicines (2010–2018)

Journal article published in 2020 by Sean Lybrand ORCID, Michael Wonder ORCID
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

ObjectivesThe Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) provides timely, reliable, and affordable access to necessary medicines for Australians. We reviewed the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) submissions and their related outcomes and timelines since 2010.MethodsWe examined the PBS Website to identify submissions and their related PBAC outcomes for new medicines, new indications, and new combination products that had been considered by the PBAC since 2010.ResultsThirty-five PBAC meetings were held during the study period, at which the Committee considered 781 submissions (1,074 medicine/patient population pairings). We saw an increase in the annual number of submissions (medicine/patient population parings). The recommendation rate for the study period was higher than the rejection rate. The annual mean value for the period from the date of initial PBAC recommendation to the date of PBS listing ranged from 357 to 644 days; the annual mean value for the period of the date of PBAC recommendation to the date of PBS listing ranged from 187 to 245 days. It took, on average, 1.70 submissions that included an economic evaluation to obtain a PBAC recommendation. It took more submissions to obtain a PBAC recommendation for a cost-effectiveness analysis submission than it did for a CMA submission. The PBAC was willing to recommend medicines for most acceptable base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) bands, and the majority of the PBAC did not recommended any medicine in the study period that had a base-case ICER >AUD75,000.ConclusionsThe results of our analyses reveal a minor reduction in the period from the date of PBAC recommendation to the date of PBS listing. Several analyses were hampered by a high proportion of missing data.