You are here

Reply from Department for Health

I have just recieved the following email response from the Department for Health:

 Thank you for your correspondence of 9 May to Andrew Lansley about the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) appraisal of dasatinib, nilotinib and high dose imatinib for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) that is resistant to standard-dose imatinib.  I have been asked to reply.

 

I would firstly like to stress that NICE has not yet issued its final guidance on the use of these drugs to the NHS.  NICE published draft guidance for consultation on 6 May and was unable to recommend these treatments as a clinically and cost effective use of NHS resources.  Consultees can submit comments on NICE’s draft recommendations until 27 May. 
 
Further information is available from the NICE website at http://guidance.nice.org.uk/Topic/Cancer/Haematological.
 
Ministers understand that NICE’s draft guidance on the use of these drugs will come as a disappointment to people who have CML and their families.  These are very difficult decisions to make and NICE only issues draft guidance to the NHS on the use of a treatment after very careful consideration of the available evidence and wide consultation with stakeholders.  I am sure you will appreciate that it would not be appropriate for Ministers or Departmental officials to intervene in an ongoing NICE appraisal.
 
In the absence of final NICE guidance, or a positive recommendation from NICE, it is for local primary care trusts to make funding decisions based on an assessment of the available evidence and on the basis of a patient’s individual circumstances. 
 
However, the Government believes that there are significant failings within the wider system for drug pricing and access and that is why the Department has committed to reform the way the NHS pays for branded medicines.  This will provide NHS patients with better access to effective and innovative treatments at a price that secures value for the NHS. 
 
The Government’s Coalition Agreement set out plans to establish a Cancer Drugs Fund to ensure that cancer patients in England have better access to drugs that can prolong or improve their lives.  The Cancer Drugs Fund, launched on 1 April 2011, provides a means of improving patient access to cancer drugs prior to the anticipated reform of branded medicines pricing.  The Government has committed £200million to the Fund in each of the next three years. 
 
Prior to this, the Government made an additional £50million available to the NHS in 2010/11 to help patients access the cancer drugs recommended by their clinicians.  Between October 2010 and April 2011, over 2,000 cancer patients in England were able to access drugs that would otherwise not have been available to them.  Over 95 per cent of the decisions made under the interim funding arrangements resulted in treatment being agreed. 
 
Strategic health authorities (SHAs) have established regional clinically-led panels that will make decisions on the use of the Cancer Drugs Fund, building on existing arrangements.  The decisions of these panels are based on the advice of the cancer specialists who are treating these patients.  SHAs will be able to provide patients with further details of the arrangements they have in place and patients are advised to discuss treatment options with their clinician in order to decide the best course of action.
 
I hope this reply is helpful.

 

I'm afraid its just the usual waffle  & know sign of anything happening to help our cause.

Bob

Bob

I agree this is waffle. Could I suggest you do not accept it and send a reply saying it is waffle and asking for a reply to the serious questions that arise. Make a nuisance of yourself! I am. Who runs the country: NICE or the DoH? Why should Scotland have these drugs if we can't? Does the DoH intend to create deliberately a national lottery (as opposed to a post code lottery) between Scotland and England? Does the DoH understand that the NICE appraisal model is simply not fit for purpose for new inhibitor drugs for use in rare diseases with a small patient population. As Professors Goldman, Apperley, Clark and Craddock said in a letter to the Daily Telegraph yesterday "We find the committee's arguments in support of this decision to be perverse, inconsistent and demonstrative of an organisation struggling to accommodate the demands that such innovative therapies place upon procedures developed over a decade ago..." ...and so on.

Good luck.