In an explosive submission to a Senate inquiry, the medical brains
who decide which drugs get government subsidies have lashed out at some
of the big pharmaceutical company's strategies.
The Pharmaceutical
Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) typically deliberates behind closed
doors but has taken the unusual step of making a public submission.
In the submission it complained that some companies push costly cancer drugs which add little to a patient's life expectancy. It
also accused some companies of using the timing of their submissions to
the PBAC as a wedge to maximise their chances of approval by, for
example, submitting an application for a government subsidy before the
regulator has approved it for use.
The submission stated that some new cancer drugs would on average
only add about two months to a patient's life, but can cost up to
$100,000. "It is important to note that almost all new cancer
drugs are not dramatically more effective than existing treatments," it
stated. "PBAC is required to consider the adverse effects of new
drugs compared to existing treatments, as well as the effect on quality
of life.
"In the case Regorafenib (a bowel cancer drug) for
example, the PBAC found that the very small gain in life expectancy was
outweighed by the significant increase in toxicity as well as
substantially higher costs." The committee said it was strongly
opposed to suggestions that companies be allowed to bypass the PBAC to
fast-track access to new cancer drugs.
It said this would greatly
increase the costs to taxpayers and lead to "justified resentment" among
patients with other diseases.
The committee said it was worried patients were being misled about the potential benefits of some medications.
No comments:
Post a Comment