This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/sep/04/cancer-charities-condemn-nhs-england-for-axing-medicines

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Cancer charities condemn NHS England for axing medicines Cancer charities condemn NHS England for axing medicines
(35 minutes later)
Cancer charities have said the decision by NHS England to strike at least a dozen medicines off the list the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) will pay for is a “hammer blow” for patients that will shorten lives. Cancer charities have said the decision by NHS England to strike at least a dozen medicines off the list that the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) will pay for is a “hammer blow” for patients that will shorten lives.
The Rarer Cancers Foundation, which campaigned to get the fund set up in 2011, said 5,500 NHS cancer patients who might have benefited from the expensive medicines will no longer have the chance.The Rarer Cancers Foundation, which campaigned to get the fund set up in 2011, said 5,500 NHS cancer patients who might have benefited from the expensive medicines will no longer have the chance.
Among the drugs that will no longer be available on the NHS are medicines for breast cancer, multiple myeloma, bowel cancer, pancreatic cancer, cervical cancer and leukaemia.Among the drugs that will no longer be available on the NHS are medicines for breast cancer, multiple myeloma, bowel cancer, pancreatic cancer, cervical cancer and leukaemia.
The fund pays for drugs that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) turns down for NHS use as insufficiently cost-effective, usually because they offer only a few potential extra weeks of life.The fund pays for drugs that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) turns down for NHS use as insufficiently cost-effective, usually because they offer only a few potential extra weeks of life.
The axing of Kadycla, however, which can extend the lives of women with a particular form of advanced breast cancer by six months, caused particular consternation. Nice agreed it was an effective drug, but said Roche’s price tag of £90,000 a patient a year was unacceptable.The axing of Kadycla, however, which can extend the lives of women with a particular form of advanced breast cancer by six months, caused particular consternation. Nice agreed it was an effective drug, but said Roche’s price tag of £90,000 a patient a year was unacceptable.
Related: Life-extending cancer drugs to be axed by NHSRelated: Life-extending cancer drugs to be axed by NHS
Baroness Delyth Morgan, the chief executive of Breast Cancer Now, called it “a dreadful day for breast cancer patients” and said women would die because of a failed system that could not manage to bring down the high price of new cancer drugs. Lady Delyth Morgan, the chief executive of Breast Cancer Now, called it “a dreadful day for breast cancer patients” and said women would die because of a failed system that could not manage to bring down the high price of new cancer drugs.
“Kadcyla is a one-of-a-kind drug proven to extend life, and the fact is that because government, the NHS and the pharmaceutical industry have failed to agree realistic prices for new drugs, some women will die sooner,” she said.“Kadcyla is a one-of-a-kind drug proven to extend life, and the fact is that because government, the NHS and the pharmaceutical industry have failed to agree realistic prices for new drugs, some women will die sooner,” she said.
“Despite many families relying on it, the CDF has unfortunately failed, and today’s delisting will further reduce the NHS’s ability to keep pace with Europe in the treatment of breast cancer.”“Despite many families relying on it, the CDF has unfortunately failed, and today’s delisting will further reduce the NHS’s ability to keep pace with Europe in the treatment of breast cancer.”
The CDF was always supposed to be a temporary solution to the problem of cancer drugs, which come onto the market at much higher prices than medicines for other conditions. It is due to be wound up in 2016 and discussions have been going on for some time about what should replace it. The CDF was always supposed to be a temporary solution to the problem of cancer drugs, which come on to the market at much higher prices than medicines for other conditions. It is due to be wound up in 2016 and discussions have been going on for some time about what should replace it.
“It’s time that the Government showed leadership on this issue and held the pharmaceutical industry to account,” said Morgan. “We need a sustainable structure fit for the 21st century, and we hope that the upcoming CDF consultation will finally make this a reality.” “It’s time that the government showed leadership on this issue and held the pharmaceutical industry to account,” said Morgan. “We need a sustainable structure fit for the 21st century, and we hope that the upcoming CDF consultation will finally make this a reality.”
Samia al Qadhi, the chief executive of Breast Cancer Care, called the dropping of Kadcyla and another Roche breast cancer drug,Avastin, a “devastating decision” that “will mean shattered hopes for thousands of women who could have been helped”. Samia al Qadhi, the chief executive of Breast Cancer Care, called the dropping of Kadcyla and another Roche breast cancer drug, Avastin, a “devastating decision” that “will mean shattered hopes for thousands of women who could have been helped”.
“It is completely unacceptable that, in 2015, this inflexible system is blocking access to life-extending treatments like Kadcyla. Treatments that could give people valuable extra time with their loved ones and help them continue to contribute to society for many months or even years.” “It is completely unacceptable that, in 2015, this inflexible system is blocking access to life-extending treatments like Kadcyla, treatments that could give people valuable extra time with their loved ones and help them continue to contribute to society for many months or even years.”
Most charities accept that drug companies’ inflexibility over the prices they charge for new cancer medicines is part of the problem. Companies know that a low launch price in the UK will impact on what they can charge elsewhere in the world. Roche offered to cut the prices of some of its other cancer drugs, rather than sell its new flagship Kadcyla more cheaply.Most charities accept that drug companies’ inflexibility over the prices they charge for new cancer medicines is part of the problem. Companies know that a low launch price in the UK will impact on what they can charge elsewhere in the world. Roche offered to cut the prices of some of its other cancer drugs, rather than sell its new flagship Kadcyla more cheaply.
Deborah Lancaster, the director of Roche Products Limited, said: “Although only two of our medicines were selected for re-review, Roche offered NHS England £15m of savings, including on medicines not considered for the review, to protect all patients at risk of losing access.Deborah Lancaster, the director of Roche Products Limited, said: “Although only two of our medicines were selected for re-review, Roche offered NHS England £15m of savings, including on medicines not considered for the review, to protect all patients at risk of losing access.
“Nothing in the clinical effectiveness of our medicines has changed since NHS England last reviewed them in January. No matter how much of a saving we offer, some medicines will not be retained on the CDF list from November due to NHS England’s review criteria.”“Nothing in the clinical effectiveness of our medicines has changed since NHS England last reviewed them in January. No matter how much of a saving we offer, some medicines will not be retained on the CDF list from November due to NHS England’s review criteria.”
Two drugs for multiple myeloma will be cut from 1 November, when the new list comes into force. Eric Low, the chief executive of Myeloma UK, said patients in England would be disadvantaged by comparison with those in Scotland and Wales. Scotland has approved both Revlimid (lenalidomide) and Imnovid (pomalidomide), while Wales recently agreed to fund pomalidomide.Two drugs for multiple myeloma will be cut from 1 November, when the new list comes into force. Eric Low, the chief executive of Myeloma UK, said patients in England would be disadvantaged by comparison with those in Scotland and Wales. Scotland has approved both Revlimid (lenalidomide) and Imnovid (pomalidomide), while Wales recently agreed to fund pomalidomide.
“The news that life-prolonging myeloma drugs are being removed from the Cancer Drugs Fund is awful and represents a massive step backward,” said Low. “If this trajectory of travel continues, we’ll be back to the 1800s in the treatment we’re offering patients. “Since the creation of the Cancer Drugs Fund, Myeloma UK has consistently argued that it is not a long-term solution to accessing cancer drugs on the NHS and does not address the reasons why drugs were not approved by Nice in the first place. “The news that life-prolonging myeloma drugs are being removed from the Cancer Drugs Fund is awful and represents a massive step backward,” said Low. “If this trajectory of travel continues, we’ll be back to the 1800s in the treatment we’re offering patients.
“Since the creation of the Cancer Drugs Fund, Myeloma UK has consistently argued that it is not a long-term solution to accessing cancer drugs on the NHS and does not address the reasons why drugs were not approved by Nice in the first place.
“The government has been far too slow to address the critical flaws of the Cancer Drugs Fund and has let things develop to the stage where important and life-prolonging drugs are being delisted from the fund. The reality is that it is patients that are going to suffer as a consequence of this idleness.”“The government has been far too slow to address the critical flaws of the Cancer Drugs Fund and has let things develop to the stage where important and life-prolonging drugs are being delisted from the fund. The reality is that it is patients that are going to suffer as a consequence of this idleness.”
Professor Peter Clark, the chair of the Cancer Drugs Fund and an oncologist, said: “There is no escaping the fact that we face a difficult set of choices, but it is our duty to ensure we get maximum value from every penny available on behalf of patients.Professor Peter Clark, the chair of the Cancer Drugs Fund and an oncologist, said: “There is no escaping the fact that we face a difficult set of choices, but it is our duty to ensure we get maximum value from every penny available on behalf of patients.
“We must ensure we invest in those treatments that offer the most benefit, based on rigorous evidence-based clinical analysis and an assessment of the cost of those treatments.”“We must ensure we invest in those treatments that offer the most benefit, based on rigorous evidence-based clinical analysis and an assessment of the cost of those treatments.”
The fund’s budget, which was £200m a year at launch, has been considerably overspent. It has now been increased to £340m a year.The fund’s budget, which was £200m a year at launch, has been considerably overspent. It has now been increased to £340m a year.
NHS England said in a statement that “despite previous action taken to contain costs, current projections suggest that spending would rise to around £410m for this year, an overspend of £70m, in the absence of further prioritisation.NHS England said in a statement that “despite previous action taken to contain costs, current projections suggest that spending would rise to around £410m for this year, an overspend of £70m, in the absence of further prioritisation.
“This money could be used for other aspects of cancer treatment or important NHS services for other patient groups.”“This money could be used for other aspects of cancer treatment or important NHS services for other patient groups.”