United Kingdom: New Cancer Drugs Better than NHS Offerings

[Guest guest]

[The reason these effective drugs are not offered, even if the patient

pays for them himself? Money, and a feeling that the rich should not

spend money on the things they want.

It's ironic that the socialized medicine countries are moving away

from government-run health care systems just as the United States is

rushing towards them.

If you live in the US, your care WILL be affected.]

The Sunday TimesJune 15, 2008

Banned cancer drugs better than NHS ones

With privately bought drugs proving to be up to five times as

effective as NHS treatments, The Sunday Times reports on the suffering

the co-payments ban is inflicting on patients-Kate Templeton,

Health Editor

The National Health Service is providing dying cancer patients with

drugs that are five times less effective than those available

privately and is refusing to treat them if they try to buy medicines

themselves.

One drug for kidney cancer, routinely available through public health

systems in most European countries but not to British patients, can

reduce the size of tumours in 31% of patients, compared with just 6%

of those prescribed the standard NHS drug.

The growing row over “co-payments†has prompted the government to

reconsider the ban. Alan , the health secretary, has promised a

“fundamental rethink†of the policy.

Ministers rethink ban on private drugs in NHS

‘We’ve paid into the system all our lives. Why has the NHS turned on us?’

Doctors' anger at cruelty to patients

The shift comes as increasing numbers of cancer doctors defy the

official Whitehall ban and allow patients to pay for drugs while still

receiving NHS care.

Doctors at the Royal Marsden hospital in London and consultants at the

NHS trust in Swansea are offering patients NHS care while they pay to

receive drugs that will prolong their lives. Last week The Sunday

Times revealed that about 16 consultants in Birmingham are ignoring

the government guidance.

Research presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology found

that kidney patients taking the new drug Sutent lived six months

longer than those prescribed alpha interferon, the NHS treatment.

The failure of the NHS to make more effective drugs available to

cancer patients has been condemned as “unethical†by leading doctors.

Wagstaff, professor of oncology at Swansea University, said:

“This has created a very difficult situation for us. Having seen the

latest data, I believe it is now pretty unethical to give many

patients alpha interferon [rather than Sutent]. We are often forced to

prescribe interferon because we do not have access to Sutent [on the

NHS], but I am always upfront with the patients. I tell them what I

think the most effective treatment is.â€

Eight times as many patients in Germany and France receive Sutent as

in Britain, according to figures held by Pfizer, the manufacturer.

Sutent, which costs about £2,200 a month compared with about £800 for

the NHS drug, is one of a number of life-prolonging new drugs at the

centre of the co-payments row.

In advanced kidney cancer, when the patient cannot be treated with any

other drug, Nexavar, another medicine, can double the period when the

disease is held under control.

A trial of Nexavar, comparing the effect of the drug with a placebo,

showed it to be so effective that the trial had to be halted early as

it was considered unethical not to give it to all the patients in the

test. Tumours were prevented from growing for an average of 5.5 months

in patients taking Nexavar, against 2.8 months in those taking the

placebo. Despite the findings, Nexavar is not routinely funded by the

NHS.

Similarly, bowel cancer patients are up to four times as likely to see

their tumour shrink if they pay for Erbitux than if they take

irinotecan, the NHS-approved drug, alone. A study published in the New

England Journal of Medicine in 2004 showed that 23% of patients

experienced a reduction in the size of their tumour when they took

Erbitux and irinotecan.

Other studies showed that just 5% of patients have the same benefit

from taking irinotecan alone. Those taking irinotecan alone had their

bowel cancer under control for 4.2 months, but this rose to 8.6 months

when Erbitux was added.

Erbitux, costing about £3,000 a month, is funded for bowel cancer in

most European countries. Patients in France are 13 times, in Spain 10

times and in Germany nine times more likely to get the drug than Britons.

The drug Avastin offers similar benefits. Research presented earlier

this year showed that patients who receive Avastin and routine

chemotherapy before surgery are twice as likely to be alive two years

later as those who receive only the chemotherapy available on the NHS.

Fireman is denied treatment

A former fireman who developed liver cancer after 25 years’ service

has been told that if he pays for the only drug that can treat his

disease his NHS care will be withdrawn.

Barry Humphrey, 59, from North Walsham, Norfolk, was told by NHS

doctors that the drug Nexavar was the only available treatment for his

advanced liver cancer.

However, consultants at Addenbrooke’s hospital in Cambridge said the

drug was not routinely funded by the NHS and told him that if he paid

for it he would be billed for the rest of his NHS care.

Humphrey believes his cancer is linked to his time as a fireman. His

cancer was caused by cirrhosis of the liver after he contracted

hepatitis C. He believes he caught the virus from a casualty while on

duty.

Research presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology found

patients with advanced liver cancer survive for an average of 11

months if they take Nexavar, while those denied the drug live for just

eight months.

Humphrey’s wife Hazel, 58, who also worked in the fire service, said:

“Doctors said this would ‘not be viable’ because we would be deemed as

opting out of the NHS and would need to pay for everything.

“I think it is absolutely disgraceful. When people are terminally ill,

they want to spend as much time as they possibly can extending their

life expectancy.†She said the couple know the drug will not provide a

cure but should have the right to spend their savings to prolong her

husband’s life.

They plan to sell a flat that they have been renting out to raise the

cash for the drug, which costs about £3,000 a month. Humphrey, who has

four children, six grandchildren and helps to care for his elderly

mother, said: “I think this is morally wrong and indefensible.â€

Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, which runs

Addenbrooke’s, said: “We are complying with the national guidance

which says we cannot allow co-funding.â€

A family’s battle

A woman with bowel cancer is fighting for the right to pay for a drug

that could extend her life long enough for her to spend Christmas with

her grandchildren.

Sheila Norrington, 59, a former NHS medical secretary from Maidstone,

Kent, has been told by doctors that if she buys the drug Erbitux,

which the health service will not pay for, she will lose her

state-funded cancer care. Erbitux is the only drug capable of treating

her advanced bowel cancer.

Norrington’s husband, Goff, 61, a former sales manager, said: “We have

been told that if we pay for it ourselves we will be thrown off the

NHS completely and we will need to pay for everything privately. We

are devastated. This is not going to cure my wife, but if it keeps her

alive a little bit longer, then we would pay for it.â€

The couple say that although they could pay for a few cycles of the

drug, which costs about £3,000 a month, they could not pay for all

Norrington’s care, including scans, blood tests and consultations.

Goff Norrington added: “We have two young granddaughters and this

could make the difference between sitting round the table with them at

Christmas or not. We think it is deplorable that patients can get this

drug almost anywhere in Europe but we cannot get it in the UK.â€

A spokesman for Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust said: “We are

governed by Department of Health policy on this issue.â€

The public’s view

A poll for The Sunday Times shows strong support for allowing

co-payment in the National Health Service, with 89% saying that people

who buy additional cancer drugs should continue to get free NHS

treatment.

Only 5% think allowing co-payment would create a two-tier NHS. Until

now this has been the position taken by Alan , the health

secretary.

Ministers had feared that allowing co-payment would upset less

well-off patients, but the YouGov poll of nearly 1,800 people shows

strong backing across the social spectrum and supporters of all three

main parties.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4138237.ece