PP93 Health Technology Assessments For Rare Diseases In Australia: A Case Study On Cystic Fibrosis

Introduction

Currently, no cure exists for the 1 in 2,500 Australian babies born with potentially fatal cystic fibrosis (CF). The authors conducted a health technology assessment (HTA) case study analysis of all regulatory approved CF treatments in Australia from January 1994 to July 2022. Submissions were also made under the Therapeutics Goods Administration and Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (TGA-PBAC) parallel process.

Methods

Public summary and source materials were researched to understand relevant clinical and health economic evidence requirements, and access decisions from Australia’s lead HTA body, PBAC.

Results

The review found that there are more than seven approved products in Australia. Of those, all four novel CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulating medications, which treat the underlying disease, received an orphan drug designation and were eventually listed. However, initial HTA decisions were mixed, with one recommended (25%), one not recommended (25%), and two deferred (50%). Clinical efficacy, cost-effectiveness, clinical need, as well as patient/carer-centric perspectives were most influential in HTA recommendations. Like other rare disease treatments, price, high incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), uncertainty around cost-effectiveness and/or efficacy were key barriers to positive decisions. Notably, Australian stakeholders did not recommend CF medicines when their ICERs significantly exceeded a threshold of AUD200,000 (USD134,700) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Administratively, Australia addresses risks associated with poor cost-effectiveness and high costs through managed access programs, risk-sharing agreements (RSA) and special pricing arrangements.

Recently approved elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor would be inaccessible to many Australian patients without inclusion in the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS); this placement increases access by limiting patients’ payments to AUD42.50 (USD28.62) maximum per prescription. Alternatively, manufacturers of therapies for other chronic or rare life-threatening conditions can participate in Australia’s Highly Specialised Drugs Program and/or Life Saving Drugs Program to facilitate access.

Conclusions

Companies can accelerate and optimize market access by using the TGA-PBAC parallel process. Other Asia-Pacific countries can model components of Australia’s approach to advancing access to innovative, live-saving therapies.