Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 2:26:04 to 2:30:53
Details on the rapid review of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis medicines and the impact of pricing policies on PBS listings.
Topics: Health, Government spending
Speakers: Jo Watson, Senator Anne Ruston, Unknown Speaker
>> I do, Senator.
>> Yes. Okay. [laughter] Um, so when did Peback originally recommend that um these new um medicines be listed on the um on the PBS um O Grievous and Cassa?
>> Sorry, what what uh I I don't go by the brand name Senator Pac we use.
>> You're going to try and make me
pronounce that, aren't you? I [laughter]
>> There was one thing Greg Hart was incredibly good at. He said about it. Um okay, so um [laughter] I'm not even going to try. Um so we're talking about medicines um the mod the multiple scerosis um medicines that went before Peback. So I'm just um interested when did Peback originally recommend these medicines be listed on the PBS?
Uh I'll I'll have to go back and look. There's quite a number of medicines for MS. But I think in regards to the issue uh that led to the PBAC recommending a review of all the um relapsing remitting maliperosis medicines that is currently underway. We listed a new medicine and uh in that recommendation uh going forward uh pricing policy came into effect as part of the negotiations between the department and the sponsor >> and at that point uh I would just remind everyone there is a delineation between the role of the PBAC and then the department.
>> Yeah. Um okay. So the my understanding is the department referred this matter as it directly related to the delisting of these medicines. So I suppose um I'm just do I understand correctly that at the time of the original decision um the peback determined that these medicines um were more effective than the older treatments. So the new medicines, so we we're delisting the older treatments that the new um that the new medicines that were more effective than the older treatments. Is that fair and hence the higher price was acceptable?
>> Uh no, Minister, I don't I don't think that's a um a totally accurate way I would describe the deliberations for the latest the newest medicine that was given a positive recommendation. uh the basis of the positive recommendation of the latest uh medicine for multiple sclerosis was uh as a cost minimization uh recommendation and uh with all of that that goes with it with the current pricing policies uh and and and the application of reference pricing. uh what it does is give effect then for the pricing area of the department to look at the the flow on effects if you like to what is basically price reductions.
>> Yep. So I note that the minister's made public comments um at press conferences that he'd like to see these drugs remain on the PBS. Would PEBAT consider those public comments by the minister to be an instruction under the NA National Health Act from the decision maker um or just um a standard input like any other consumer um or MS patient? I mean does the minister's commentary um have hold greater weight or sway as it relates to the National Health Act?
>> No, it doesn't.
>> Okay. Um so when is when is the is PET like to make the determination in relation to the ongoing listings?
>> So minister we have a uh what we call a rapid review underway. Uh it's being carried out by the department with uh advice uh from our previous consideration uh to the department about that review and the scope of it. >> Uh part of the work is being undertaken also by an uh external academic group. uh we've got the department working with that external academic group. We've held one stakeholder meeting with our uh expert clinicians and the MS Australia patient networks. We un have asked the department to bring the report back to us for the December intracycle meeting of PBAC at which case uh we'll be looking at what's there and having a discussion about uh where it all sits.