Commenting on the publication of the Government’s consultation on branded NHS medicines, http://nds.coi.gov.uk/Content/Detail.asp?ReleaseID=371000&NewsAreaID=2

Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said:

1.“It is the Government’s responsibility to secure value-for-money for the NHS. The OFT report last year “identified hundreds of millions of pounds of expenditure that we believe could be used more efficiently.” The Government’s proposal of an across-the-board price cut, however, continues with the structure of scheme which fails to secure prices that reflect the therapeutic value of the drugs supplied to the NHS.

 The Government has breached the previous PPRS deal, prejudiced pharmaceutical industry stability, but failed to bring forward proposals for the value-for-money pricing scheme needed for the longer-term. Far from delivering the longer-term decisions, the Labour Government have only gone for a short-term price cut.

 A five per cent price cut will yield £300 -£400 million. However there is no proposal to use at least part of these resources to ensure NHS patients get access to clinically effective and appropriate new medicines on the NHS.

 As I challenged Alan Johnson yesterday, 20 European countries make Erbitux - the cancer drug Linda O’Boyle requested – available for the treatment of colorectal cancer. The NHS doesn’t on “cost effectiveness” grounds. If we can cut drug costs elsewhere, and wish to support innovation, surely it is essential that the NHS is no longer among the slowest countries in Europe in the uptake of new and effective medicines. Today’s announcement fails to address this central failure in our drugs policy”.

 
2. The OFT report identified key concerns with the Government’s proposed approach:

 a) “We have an overriding concern with the scheme as it is currently designed: neither the profit cap nor the price cut helps secure prices that reflect the therapeutic value of the drugs companies are supplying to the NHS. For a scheme that sets out to deliver value for money for the NHS and give companies the right incentives to invest, we consider this to be a major shortcoming, particularly in view of the demand side problems we have identified in the rest of the NHS”.

 
p.3, The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme (PPRS), An OFT Market study, February 2007.

 b) 4.86 Ultimately, whether or not prices are value-reflective under current arrangements is an empirical issue. That is why we have undertaken, as part of this study, an assessment of the relative costs and clinical benefits of some of the largest selling drugs in the NHS. This is set out in Annexe M. We have identified hundreds of millions of pounds of expenditure that we believe could be used more cost effectively, in allowing patients access to the drugs and other treatments they need, but where access is currently restricted.

 
4.87 Where access is restricted on cost or cost effectiveness grounds, it is vitally important that all drugs – old and new – are assessed on the same basis. This does not happen across the board under current arrangements. To restrict access to new treatments while ignoring inefficiencies in current expenditure is not an efficient use of resources. Nor is it in the interests of patients.

 p.68, The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme, An OFT Market study, February 2007.
Available at: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/comp_policy/oft885.pdf

 
3. In Britain, we have among the leading cancer research institutes in Europe. It is, frankly, a scandal that NHS patients are among those in Europe least likely to have access to the latest cancer medicines. The Karolinska Institute reported:

 “The UK has a poor (drugs) uptake, which is lower than the average throughout Europe, and a slow rate even after the drugs have been available for 4 years”.

 The Karolinska Institute, A pan-European comparison regarding patient access to cancer drugs.
Available at: http://ki.se/content/1/c4/33/52/Cancer_Report.pdf

 4. We spend the European equivalent on our healthcare yet drugs which are routinely available in Europe are not available in the UK. For example – Erbitux – a cancer drug used for colon, neck and throat cancers is routinely available in 20 European countries but not in the UK.

18th June 2008


Also.... Andrew Lansley and House of Commons Debate on Polyclinics ...more

17th June 2008