granulomatosis with polyangiitis and microscopic polyangiitis
Immunology · 2015–2024
Every decision
| Medicine | Meeting | Outcome | Consumer input |
|---|---|---|---|
| avacopan Treatment of severe active granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) and severe active microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) in combination with rituximab or… | Mar 2024 | Recommended with restriction | 17 individuals Australian Rheumatology Association · Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy |
| avacopan Treatment of severe active granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) and severe active microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) in combination with rituximab or… | Jul 2023 | Not recommended | input received Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy · Australian Rheumatology Association |
| rituximab Remission induction in patients with severe active granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) who are contraindicated or… | Jul 2015 | Deferred | 6 individuals |
Who spoke
Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy · Australian Rheumatology Association
What the PBS pays
$34M in government benefit over 2024–25, across 58,436 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 |
|---|---|
| rituximab | $23.9M |
| avacopan | $10.4M |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| avacopanAvacopan for treating severe active granulomatosis with polyangiitis or microscopic polyangiitis | TA825 | recommended restricted | 2022-09 |
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 3 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.