autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease
Rare disease · 2017–2019
Every decision
| Medicine | Meeting | Outcome | Consumer input |
|---|---|---|---|
| tolvaptan Autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) in patients with an eGFR between 30 and 89 mL/min/1.73 m² and rapidly progressing disease. | Nov 2019 | Recommended with restriction | none received |
| tolvaptan Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) in patients with stage 2–3 chronic kidney disease and rapidly progressing disease. | Jul 2018 | Recommended with restriction | 17 individuals PKD Foundation Australia |
| tolvaptan Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) in patients with CKD stages 2-3 at initiation of treatment with evidence of rapidly progressing disease. | Mar 2018 | Deferred | 49 individuals Kidney Health Australia |
| tolvaptan Treatment of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) in adults with CKD stages 1-3 with evidence of rapidly progressing disease. | Mar 2017 | Not recommended | 8 individuals Kidney Health Australia |
Who spoke
Kidney Health Australia · PKD Foundation Australia
What the PBS pays
$14M in government benefit over 2024–25, across 9,406 services.
This is spend on the medicines considered for this condition, not spend on the disease. A medicine used for several conditions is counted in full under each, so figures across conditions add to more than national PBS expenditure.
| Medicine | Government benefit |
|---|---|
| tolvaptan | $13.6M |
Appraised elsewhere
NICE, in England and Wales, has appraised 1 technology for this condition, recommending 1 . A different committee, a different population and a different price: this is what has been looked at there, not a verdict on what happened here.
| Technology | Appraisal | Outcome | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| tolvaptanTolvaptan for treating autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease | TA358 | recommended restricted | 2015-10 |
Conditions are classified by a language model from the indication text of each submission, so an individual label here can be wrong. Consumer input is read from the document's own consumer comments section: 3 of 4 decisions since 2014 carried some. Silence means no comment reached the committee through that facility, not that nobody was affected. More on how this was built.