Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 8:42:55 to 8:48:07
Discussion on PBS requirements for children with Crohn's disease to trial steroids before accessing biologic treatments, and ongoing PBAC work to improve access for serious inflammatory conditions.
Topics: Health, Child safety
Speakers: Senator David Pocock, Mr Andrew Rintoul, Senator Ellie Whiteaker, Mr Daniel McCabe, Ms Jo Watson, Mr Blair Comley
We are moving to outcome two, individual health benefits, and we have officers from the Department of Health Disability and Aging in relation to that outcome here for questions. I believe we also have the deputy chair of the pharmaceutical benefits advisory committee, adjunct associate Professor Joe Watson joining us also. And we're joined by Senator the Honourable Nita Green, Assistant Minister for Northern Australia, Tourism and Pacific Island Affairs, representing the Minister for Health, Disability and Ageing. Would you like to make an opening statement? No, thanks, Chair. Thank you. Excellent. Well, Senator David Pocock, over to you.
Um Secretary. Uh the Chair thanked you like I thought you were going to have a bit of a break, but I didn't have to point that out.
This week is only a day and a third or two-thirds. The May period was the three days was there.
So this is a cakewalk for you. Um I've got some questions about access to biologic treatments for children with Crohn's disease. And I know we've um gone over this a number of times at Senate Estimates. Um obviously raised this a number of times that Senate estimates and I PBAC has considered it on a number of occasions. Um obviously talking about children with Crohn's disease and other serious inflammatory conditions who are being required to trial medications like um uh methotrexate and high dose steroids before they can access biologic treatments through the PBS. Um children dealing with debilitating um illnesses, and who's treating specialists are concerned that delaying access to appropriate treatments and access to biologics could cause permanent irreversible damage. Can you get an update of where we're at and why this is taking so long to actually get a get a solution?
Hi, um Andrew Rintel, uh Assistant Secretary Technology Assessment and Access Division. Um the department and the PBAC acknowledge that you know the the severity of inflammatory brow disease, like Crohn's disease and the major impact it has on children and their parents. Um, there's a range of um since March twenty twenty-four, the department and the pharmaceutical benefits advisory committee have been working with clinicians and patient representatives to ensure the PBS criteria for inflammatory bowel disease reflect contemporary clinical practice. There's been a range of recommendations made by the um PBAC um since December twenty twenty-four, and I could sort of step through the changes in that um the implementation of those, if that's helpful, or provide them on notice as well.
Um, maybe on notice, how how far away are we from actually getting this?
So there's a range of things that have been completed, and then there are some things that are partially completed, but um, from December twenty twenty-four through to the recommendations in May twenty twenty-six, we anticipate that they'll be completed by the end of this calendar year. Um at a high level summary, um the work for Crohn's disease has been complete. Um, and partially uh what we haven't completed is the work related to ulcerative colitis as well. So that should be completed by the end of this calendar yeah.
Senator Dennis McKay, uh, first Secretary of Technology assessment and access to me. Uh, we have the uh Deputy Chair of the PBAC at the table, uh, and I wanted to just uh defer to her as it's been a lot of work as uh Mr. Riddler said on really trying to resolve some of the issues that we've talked about in the previous hearing, so it might be just helpful uh if Professor Watson could just give an update as well.
Uh thank you and uh Joe Watson, Deputy Chair of the PBAC, and this week I'm acting chair.
Um Professor Watson, I understand in the past that that positive P back recommendations could be implemented within six to fourteen weeks. Maybe this isn't actually for you. It's for the department. Well why is this taking so long? It seems after a few years, seems like there's a clear issue. Uh a very clear potential solution. It's actually allowing health practitioners to use a bit more discretion. Why haven't we landed there yet? Why is it taking so long?