OBJECTIVES: Pharmaceutical companies have been able to submit information related to pharmacoeconomics as a reference material when applying for National Health Insurance drug price listing under current Japanese system. The purpose of this study is to investigate a role of pharmacoeconomic analysis in achieving high drug pricing in the past.  METHODS: The status of acquiring premium for drugs listed on drug price listing in 10 years from 2004 to 2013 in Japan was studied. For drugs acquired premium for usefulness I and premium for innovation with further premium expected, papers studied on cost-effectiveness of the drug for Japanese patients were searched by Pubmed and Japan Medical Abstracts Society database, to investigate the role of pharmacoeconomic analysis in assessing premium acquisition.  RESULTS: There were 9 new drugs which acquired premium for usefulness I in 10 years from 2004 to 2013 in Japan. No new drug was granted premium for innovation. There were cost-effectiveness studies having the same indication on 2 drugs, one each for the drugs (Cinacalcet hydrochloride for secondary hyperparathyroidism under maintenance dialysis: premium rate 25% [2007], Perflubutane for imaging of hepatic mass lesions in ultrasonography: premium rate 35% [2006]). No relationship for considering premium rate was observed from each paper.  CONCLUSIONS: Although pharmaceutical companies have been allowed to submit pharmacoeconomicanalysis when applying for drug price listing of new drug in Japan, it may have not been fully functioned. Pharmaceutical companies would have a meaningful discussion on consideration for pharmacoeconomic analysis utilization, heading towards introduction of pharmacoeconomic analysis on a trial basis starting from the 2016 fiscal year.