PBAC's latest decision on Glucosamine hydrochloride: Not recommended (2006). Considered for symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis.
PBAC outcome
Not recommended
2006
ICER (AUD/QALY)
Cost-min
cost-minimisation analysis
Submissions
1
first 2006
Submissions
1
2006 → 2006
Eligible population
patients with knee pain from osteoarthritis
Therapy area
Pain
Evidence base
RCT, Single-arm
Key trials
Clegg et al (2006), Houpt et al (1999), Qui et al (2005)
Comparator
celecoxib
Economic model
Cost-minimisation
ICER note
Cost-minimisation approach was attempted, but PBAC found it had no foundation due to lack of demonstrated non-inferiority. A modelled cost comparison was presented showing incremental savings of $265 per person per year, but this was not used as the basis for the decision.
Why PBAC said no
Reasons cited in the latest PSD: Lack of evidence demonstrating relevant clinical efficacy with an appropriate comparator; non-inferiority claim between glucosamine hydrochloride and celecoxib poorly supported by key trials; glucosamine hydrochloride performed no better than placebo in both key trials while celecoxib performed better than placebo; inappropriate comparator selection (celecoxib not subsidised for non-inflammatory osteoarthritis); concerns regarding usage estimates