Glucosamine Hydrochloride
Not recommended Musculo-skeletal
Symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis.
2
Submissions
2006–06
On the record
—
ICER range
Cost-min
Cost basis
Access path
- Jul 2006Not recommended
Lack of evidence demonstrating relevant clinical efficacy with an appropriate comparator; non-inferiority claim between…
- Jul 2006Not recommended
Claim for non-inferiority between glucosamine hydrochloride and celecoxib poorly supported by key trials; glucosamine…
RecommendedDeferredNot recommended
Cost-effectiveness
Cost-minimisation approach was proposed but rejected because non-inferiority to celecoxib was not established; a modelled cost comparison was presented but no ICER range was stated in the public document.
The PBAC agreed that the choice of the cost-minimisation approach was only valid if non-inferiority was accepted. PBAC · 2006
Economic model disputedSurrogate endpoint
Decision context
PopulationPatients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.
Why it was knocked back
- Claim for non-inferiority between glucosamine hydrochloride and celecoxib poorly supported by key trials; glucosamine hydrochloride performed no better than placebo; inappropriate comparator (celecoxib not subsidised for osteoarthritis without inflammatory component); lack of evidence demonstrating relevant clinical efficacy
Submission history
| Decided | Outcome | Comparator | ICER | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2006 | Not recommended | celecoxib | — | RCT, Single-arm |
| Jul 2006 | Not recommended | celecoxib | — | RCT · WOMAC |