Pricing of cancer drugs in Australia - update on changes to the Senate Notice Paper

Parliament house flag post

Pricing of cancer drugs in Australia - update on changes to the Senate Notice Paper

Posted 28/11/2012 by Rebecca de Boer


Image source: www.pbs.gov.au

The proposed (weighted average) price cut of 76.83% for docetaxel, a drug used in the treatment of cancer, has sparked controversy. There have been claims that cost to patients will increase by about $100 and that cancer services will close as a result of this reduction. On Monday 26 November, Senator Xenophon moved a motion to disallow this price reduction but this has been withdrawn. It was replaced with a cross-party motion (Senator Xenophon, the Coalition, Australian Greens and DLP Senator Madigan) to be moved on 29 November (the last sitting day of the Parliamentary year). The Greens are now no longer part of the motion and this is reflected on the Notice Paper for 29 November (*1080, p. 11).

The motion calls on the Government to negotiate with ‘relevant bodies regarding the cost of dispensing chemotherapy drugs’ and ensure that the ‘result of these negotiations will allow pharmacists to continue dispensing the drug (docetaxel), and other chemotherapy drugs, without disrupting patients’. The motion, did, however, ‘welcome’ the price disclosure policy framework. Although the voting intentions of the Greens is not yet known, the vote on this motion is likely to be close and 39 votes are required for it to pass. Despite this, motions passed by either House are not binding on the Government.

 This price cut is part of the Expanded and Accelerated Price Disclosure Policy (EAPD) agreed by the Government and Medicines Australia in the Memorandum of Understanding in relation to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) in 2010. Price disclosure is designed to ensure that the Government reaps the benefits of the discounting arrangements between pharmacists and wholesalers for generic medicines. Manufacturers are required to disclose the actual price at which medicines are supplied to wholesalers and/or pharmacists. Price reductions occur if there is a difference of more than ten per cent between the weighted average disclosed price and the price paid by the Government.

Price reductions occur three times a year on 1 April, 1 August and 1 December. Prior to the reduction taking effect, a legislative instrument is tabled in Parliament. The Instrument must be tabled when Parliament is sitting and 'laid before each House within 6 sitting days [of that House] after the registration of the instrument' (section 38 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003). The Department is no longer legally obliged to notify manufacturers separately to the Instrument being tabled. It should be noted that there a significant time lag (around 18 months) between when the reporting period commences and when the reduction takes effect (see EAPD Operational Guidelines, p. 18).

The debate about the proposed price reduction of docetaxel has raised a number of questions about the pricing of pharmaceuticals in Australia. It has once again highlighted that Australia pays a high price for generic medicines. The Government has argued that prior to this policy being introduced, pharmacists had been charging 20% to 50% above market price for some drugs although this has been disputed by the Pharmacy Guild of Australia. Some pharmacists have argued that margin on generic medicines has been used to cross-subsidise other services and that these services will no longer be able to be provided once the price cut takes effect. Catholic Health Australia has warned that that cancer treatment services in rural and regional areas might close as a result. It has also raised questions about whether the remuneration for the dispensing of chemotherapy drugs is sufficient.

The pricing of pharmaceuticals on the PBS and the remuneration for supply of PBS medicines are two separate issues. Although there have been some challenges associated with the implementation of price disclosure (it has been subject to legal challenge) and there is debate about whether this is the most effective way to achieve savings for generic medicines, it is, currently, the dominant policy tool for the Government to reduce the cost of generic medicines. International comparisons show that the Australian Government pays considerably more for generic medicines. And while one needs to exercise caution when comparing the price of pharmaceuticals in different jurisdictions, other countries impose much harsher price reductions than the Australian government when the first generic medicine enters the market. The Australian Government imposes a reduction of only 16%, compared to around 95% achieved by countries such as the UK, Sweden and New Zealand.

Remuneration for pharmacists is governed by the Fifth Community Pharmacy Agreement. The current remuneration for dispensing chemotherapy drugs is $76.37. The Community Pharmacy Chemotherapy Group has estimated that this needs to be increased by $100 per infusion to account for preparation costs, the cost of consumables and dosage delivery services as well as other costs(such as return on capital). It is not possible to independently verify these amounts but the Minister has indicated that she is willing to consider ‘any evidence’ that the costs of delivering chemotherapy drugs needs to be reviewed.

The price cut is due to take effect on 1 December. It is not possible for pharmacists and hospitals to pass on these costs to consumers as the PBS co-payment is enshrined in legislation. Currently there is a stalemate – the Government is arguing that the cost of the medicine must ‘come down’ and stakeholders are concerned that vital services will no longer be delivered. One of the aims of the National Medicines Policy is timely and affordable access to medicines at a price that individuals and the community can afford. Perhaps a review of the cost of dispensing chemotherapy medicines might provide the evidence to inform future remuneration arrangements.

Comments

  • 21/01/2014 2:17 PM
    Martin Butterfield said:

    Perhaps I am thick, but I cannot understand this issue. I suspect it needs a child's primer in how the PBS works as an introduction. Possibly a first step is to explain who is involved in the "price" which is being reduced? A second step could then be to explain the various other steps (mark ups; "service" fees etc) which show how a price reduction ends up with the PBCV (Poor Bloody Cancer Victims) end up paying more! Martin

  • 21/01/2014 2:17 PM
    Rebecca de Boer said:

    Martin, Thanks for your comments. Pharmacists are reimbursed by the Government for medicines dispensed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). Pharmacists purchase medicines either directly from the manufacturer or through a pharmaceutical wholesaler. For generic medicines, there is often a difference between the price paid by Government and the price paid by the pharmacist to purchase the medicine. Generic medicines are not protected by patent and are relatively inexpensive to produce. In Australia, generic medicine manufacturers usually offer significant discounts to pharmacists to attract market share. The Government introduced price disclosure as a way of capturing this difference and ensuring that it reaped the savings associated with introduction of generic medicines. In short, manufacturers are required to disclose to government the price at which they sell generic medicines to pharmacists, including any product bundling deals and non-monetary incentives. This information is combined with volume data and the Government then calculates the ‘weighted average reduction’. If this is more than 10%, the government then applies this reduction to the (reimbursement) price that is paid to the pharmacist. For a more detailed explanation of the policy and its application, see this article (1) or the Procedural and Operational Guidelines for Expanded and Accelerated Price Disclosure. You may also be interested in the ‘Pricing Matters’ section on the www.pbs.gov.au website. It is important to note that patients will not pay any additional costs as a result of these changes. The PBS co-payment is determined by legislation and pharmacists are not permitted to charge above the co-payment (unless a premium applies. Less than 10% of brands on the PBS have a premium (2) with the most expensive being $13.44). Currently, the co-payment is $35.40 for general patients and $5.80 for concession card holders. For general patients who are outpatients at public hospitals, the contribution rate is $28.30. The exception to this is Queensland and in hospitals participating in the pharmaceutical reforms where patients pay the safety net value of an item listed in the PBS Schedule or up to the general co-payment amount for items not listed in the Schedule. The contribution by concession card holders in public hospitals is equal to the concessional co-payment amount. Patients in private hospitals will also not be charged extra for medicines dispensed under the PBS (3). The most recent media release from the Minister for Health further reiterates this point (4). PBS pricing is notoriously complex – I hope this brief explanation helps, Rebecca List of references (unable to hyperlink in comments section (1) PBS Reform - a missed opportunity?, Australian Health Review, May 2009, volume 33, number 2: 176-185. (2) See p. 523, Appendix A2, Pharmaceutical Benefits Pricing Authority Annual Report for year ended June 2012 included in the Department of Health and Ageing Annual Report 2011-12. (3) See Section 1.4 of 'Explanatory Notes' on the www.pbs.gov.au website for more detail about patient charges. (4) See 'Peter Dutton misleads patients on PBS listing' media release by Minister Plibersek on 28 November 2012.


Thank you for your comment. If it does not require moderation, it will appear shortly.

Add your comment

[Click to expand]

We welcome your comments, or additional information which is relevant to a post. These can be added by clicking on the ‘Add your comment’ option above. Please note that the Parliamentary Library will moderate comments, and reserves the right not to publish comments that are inconsistent with the objectives of FlagPost. This includes spam, profanity and personal abuse, as well as comments that are factually incorrect or politically partisan. We will close comments after three months.




Captcha
Generate a new image
Type characters from the image:

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Add | Email Print

FlagPost

Flagpost is a blog on current issues of interest to members of the Australian Parliament


Parliamentary Library Logo showing Information Analysis & Advice

Archive

Syndication

Tagcloud

Refugees asylum climate change immigration Australian foreign policy parliament social security welfare policy elections welfare reform school education Australian Defence Force health financing higher education emissions trading indigenous Australians women private health insurance people trafficking Employment illicit drugs gambling health reform federal election 2010 Australian Bureau of Statistics statistics United Nations Asia Afghanistan disability income management Middle East Medicare sport health forced labour United States federal budget Industrial Relations Carbon Pricing Mechanism politics dental health criminal law transport aid child protection environment poker machines Australia in the Asian Century Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency steroids World Anti-Doping Agency National Disability Insurance Scheme detention aged care 43rd Parliament slavery health system Law Enforcement Australian Federal Police Fair Work Act Australian Public Service governance labour force people smuggling debt taxation international relations constitution New Zealand food WADA Australian Crime Commission pharmaceutical benefits scheme corruption pensions public service reform children's health Aviation foreign debt gross debt net debt defence capability parliamentary procedure Senate Senators and Members ALP ASADA Newstart Parenting Payment multiculturalism Youth Allowance sea farers terrorist groups science social media Higher Education Loan Program HECS federal state relations accountability Papua New Guinea youth paid parental leave same sex relationships coal seam gas customs planning federal election 2013 Australian Electoral Commission doping OECD crime health risks International Women's Day Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling sex slavery Special Rapporteur Northern Territory Emergency Response social policy terrorism transparency research and development Mental health welfare ASIO intelligence community Australian Security Intelligence Organisation carbon tax mining High Court military history electoral reform employer employee renewable energy regional unemployment fishing European Union Federal Court family assistance skilled migration banking United Nations Security Council Australian economy forestry food labelling vocational education and training Drugs UK Parliament welfare systems Indonesia children Constitutional reform local government codes of conduct terrorist financing homelessness Parliamentary remuneration money laundering Trafficking in Persons Report energy social inclusion human rights paternalism integrity standards NATO Australian Secret Intelligence Service sexual abuse World Trade Organization Australia public health China housing affordability bulk billing political parties water productivity health policy Governor-General US economy trade unions domestic violence export liquefied natural gas foreign bribery firearms question time speaker superannuation public housing election results by-election expertise public policy climate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change leadership voting Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry regulation Pacific Islands reserved seats new psychoactive substances synthetic drugs UNODC carbon markets animal health middle class welfare ADRV Census Indigenous constitutional recognition of local government referendum consumer laws PISA competition policy royal commission US politics violence against women language education baby bonus Leaders of the Opposition citizen engagement policymaking Australia Greens servitude Trafficking Protocol forced marriage Population rural and regional alcohol entitlements ministries Hung Parliament social citizenship maritime Iran ANZUS regional students school chaplains federal budget 2011-12 salary Medicare Locals primary care Building the Education Revolution Bills anti-corruption fraud bribery corporate ownership whistleblower G20 economic reform innovation Members of Parliament Scottish referendum early childhood education Middle East; national security; terrorism social services Criminal Code Amendment (Misrepresentation of Age to a Minor) Bill 2013 online grooming sexual assault of minors ACT Assembly national security smoking plain packaging tobacco cigarettes Asia; Japan; international relations Work Health and Safety Migration; asylum seekers; regional processing China; United States; international relations fiscal policy Racial Discrimination Act; social policy; human rights; indigenous Australians Foreign policy Southeast Asia Israel Palestine asylum refugees immigration political finance donations foreign aid disability employment Economics efficiency human rights; Racial Discrimination Act employment law bullying asylum seekers Animal law; food copyright Australian Law Reform Commission industry peace keeping contracts workplace policies same-sex marriage disorderly conduct retirement Parliament House standing orders prime ministers election timetable sitting days First speech defence budget submarines workers financial sector Canada Somalia United Kingdom GDP Tasmania world heritage political engagement leave loading Trade; tariffs; safeguards; Anti-dumping public interest disclosure whistleblowing Productivity Commission limitation period universities Ireland cancer gene patents genetic testing suspension of standing and sessional orders live exports infant mortality honorary citizen railways disciplinary tribunals standard of proof World Health Organisation arts international students skilled graduate visas temporary employment visas apologies roads Italy national heritage NHMRC nutrition anti-dumping Rent Assistance obesity evidence law sacrament of confession US presidential election international days DFAT UN General Assembly deregulation Regulation Impact Statements administrative law small business Breaker Morant regional engagement social determinants of health abortion Members suspension workplace health and safety marine reserves hearing TAFE Victoria astronomy resources sector YMCA youth parliament Korea fuel rebate Australian Greens presidential nomination Racial Discrimination Act political parties preselection solar hot water Financial Action Taskforce Horn of Africa peacekeeping piracy Great Barrier Reef Stronger futures political financing political education Social Inclusion Board early childhood National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care Murray-Darling Basin sanctions Norway hospitals republic President Barack Obama Presidential visits qantas counselling Korean peninsula Work Choices biosecurity hendra environmental law federalism federation preselection therapeutic goods Therapeutic Goods Administration plebiscites computer games pests suicide nuclear COAG Ministerial Councils floods ADHD stimulant medication advertising electricity extradition conscience votes poverty preventative health rural health coastal erosion Parliamentary Budget Office work-life balance

Show all
Show less
Back to top