Health ministers under pressure to give drug companies access to NHS

13 April 2012

Ministers are under pressure from the American Government to reform the NHS to give major drug companies unrestricted access to the Health Service.

The plans could mean British patients win access to lifesaving treatments which are currently denied to them by the national drug rationing body.

But some MPs warned that giving large US drug firms access to the NHS would do little to cut costs and help patients.

American pharmaceutical giants have become frustrated by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, the body that decides which drugs and treatments must be made available by doctors and hospitals.

Patients groups are also campaigning for change to NICE after a series of contentious rulings which mean patients in England have been denied new drugs for cancer that are routinely available in the US, Europe and even Scotland - which has a different drug rationing body.

NICE has repeatedly rejected new drugs on cost rather than clinical grounds.

But the US deputy health secretary Alex Azar has been to London to lobby Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt for change, after she visited the US last week.

Mr Azar told the Guardian that allowing all new drugs to be used in the NHS would result in drug companies "fighting it out" to drive down prices.

He warned that letting Nice deny treatments to British patients in a bid to keep down costs would stifle innovation and the development of new treatments.

And he said that "steps on cost containment" like the rationing by Nice could prove "short sighted and prevent the investment in long-term biomedical research and development and innovation".

In a move that will antagonise Labour left-wingers, Mr Azar also suggested that the Government should consider offering private health insurance to the less well off as part of Labour's market makeover of the NHS and contemplate marketing drugs directly to patients - something currently banned in the UK.

Hundreds of patients have resorted to buying drugs over the Internet because Nice hs refused to make their use compulsory in the NHS.

The Daily Mail revealed last month that Nice had rejected bone marrow cancer drug Velcade, after refuding to fund treatments that extend the life of patients with Alzheimer's disease.

Earlier this week, made a preliminary ruling that Tarceva, a new treatment for lung cancers too expensive to be made available throughout the NHS.

Cancer charities were wary of speaking out in fear of offending Nice, on which they depend to endorse new drugs.

But a spokesman for the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry called for reforms to the way Nice judges cost effectiveness.

"We would like to see a more wide ranging assessment of the cost benefits of extending life and providing people with a better quality of life,' he said.

"It is not just a case of keeping people alive for longer but of helping them stay at work or off sick pay. Those benefits shouls be factored into Nice assessments. We are certainly keen to ensure that Britain remains capable of producing innovative new medicine."

But he stopped short of endorsing all the American proposals. "We would like to provide more information to patients but that is a long way from advertising directly to them," he said.

Tory health spokesman Andrew Lansley has argued that where drugs are deemed too expensive by Nice, drug companies should be given the opportunity to reduce their prices in order to prove their treatments can be effective.

A Tory spokeswoman said: "Pharmaceutical companies need to put their money where their mouth is: if they genuinely believe their treatments are cost-effective, then they have nothing to lose."

But Liberal Democrat spokesman Steve Webb questioned Mr Azar's assumptions. He said: "We have done a study of drug prices that shows they are massively higher in the US than they are here and in the rest of Europe. It may not be the case that letting drug companies bypass Nice is better value for money.

"If drugs are failing to pass Nice's tests for cost effectiveness there is nothing stopping the drug companies from reducing their prices. I am very wary of marketing drugs directly to consumers."

A Department of Health spokesperson said: "The US has a health system that suits its needs, and while that may not transport itself to the UK, it is important to hear about other systems to see if we can learn from them.

"The Government has a responsibility to ensure that the taxpayer gets value for money. NICE is an independent body, which considers the clinical and cost effectiveness of interventions and Ministers are committed to ensuring that it can continue to carry out its important work free from political interference."

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in