MANCHESTER LIB DEMS JOIN THE MOVEMBER MOVEMENT
John Thurso MP has the finest moustache in The Lib Dem Parliamentary party Manchester Withington MP John Leech and Levenshulme Councillor James Hennigan have donated their faces for the "Movember" cause this year to raise funds and awareness for prostate cancer. Movember is a worldwide charity event where men are encouraged to grow a moustache for the month of November to raise money and awareness for men's health issues particularly prostate cancer. John Leech said, "Prostate cancer is the most common cancer amongst men in the UK, I will be donning a moustache in support of Movember and will be encouraging as many people in Manchester and indeed Parliament to join me". Movember began in Australia in 2003 and has now turned into a worldwide charity event with over 44,520 people in the UK taking part last year raising just short of £5million. In the UK Movember raises money for The Prostate Cancer Charity. Levenshulme councillor James Hennigan, 23, commented, "Movember is a fantastic charity event, in the UK one man dies every hour from the disease. My rugby team Old Bedians in Didsbury have joined the cause too, we are going to look an odd team but it's for a great cause!" To donate log onto www.movember.com/donate and donate to the team "Manchester Mo's". To join the team simply log onto movember.com/join and select the team "Manchester Mo's". Published and promoted by Manchester Liberal Democrats, c/o 8 Gawsworth Avenue, M20 5NF Printed (hosted) by Prater Raines Ltd, 98 Sandgate High Street, Folkestone CT20 3BY
LEECH PUTS RARER CANCER AT THE TOP OF THE AGENDA
Manchester Withington MP John Leech is today tabling an adjournment debate on rarer cancers focussing specially on myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). MDS is one of a number of rarer cancers that suffer from a lack of public awareness and availability of drugs. Azacitidine (trade name Vidaza) the drug used to treat MDS has been at the centre of a fiasco surrounding the NICE appraisal. The process has already taken 18 months and with a solution not necessarily assured until March 2011, it may end up being a two year process in total. As many as 1,500 patients will have missed out on the opportunity to have access to Azacitidine by then. At the debate John will be urging the Department of Health to ensure that the Cancer Drugs Fund is used to help sufferers of cancers such as MDS. He is also calling on the Department of Health to reform the NICE methodology to make it more suitable for assessing medicines for rarer cancers. He said, "MDS is a life-threatening illness and one that is currently terribly served by the NICE process. The only available treatment is currently being denied to patients, and although I do hope that NICE reverses its decision, I fear that ministerial intervention may be needed to bring access to Azacitidine to MDS sufferers". The initial NICE decision not to give Azacitidine to MDS sufferers, despite it often being the only treatment, was appealed. The appeal succeeded (more information attached below) and NICE have reopened the appraisal. The refusal of NICE to recognise orphan drug status has created a great disparity in the treatment options for sufferers of rarer cancers. Adjournment Debate on Rarer Cancers and MP awareness John Leech, Westminster Hall Debate, Wednesday 27th October 2010. I want to take the opportunity in this debate to raise two issues. The first is the lack of awareness amongst MPs of the issues surrounding funding for treatment of rarer cancers in general and of a real lack of understanding of the complex processes and institutions that make decisions about the availability of drugs, especially to sufferers of rarer cancers. The second related topic, is that of the recent Health Technology Appraisal by NICE of the use of Azacitidine for the treatment of MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome, in particular. It is an appraisal and decision making process that highlights the problems and inequalities that sufferers of rarer cancers face in getting access to often life saving treatment. The refusal of NICE to recognise orphan drug status has created a great disparity in the treatment options for sufferers of rarer cancers. With the move to Value Based Pricing not due to come into effect until 2014, and indeed with the lack of details of how VBP will work it is essential that this inequality is addressed. With the initial £50m of funding from the Cancer Drugs Fund having already been distributed to the Strategic Health Authorities and with the opening today of the consultation on the main Cancer Drugs Fund, I suggest that today is the perfect day to restate the case for the need for far greater funding for rarer cancers. I will start with the need for greater MP awareness of rarer cancers and of the processes and institutions that evaluate the drugs that are needed to treat them. At the MDS UK lobby that I attended yesterday, the results of a survey were launched. Two thirds of MPs had no understanding of the term 'Health Technology Assessment' and one third had no understanding of the term 'Quality Adjusted Life Year'. Now of course MPs have many areas of knowledge and no one MP can claim a detailed knowledge of all subjects, but with large scale reforms of the NHS due to be discussed and voted on, it is vital that MPs gain a greater knowledge of these topics and particularly how they currently discriminate against those who suffer from rarer forms of cancer. In particular there is a great need for greater awareness of how the details of Value Based Pricing and decisions about how to allocate the Cancer Drugs Fund might or might not remove barriers to treatment for those with rarer cancers. I will not spend any more time on this other than to highlight the Rarer Cancers Tool Kit that MDS UK have collated and to mention that whilst I am concentrating on MDS today there are other rare cancers such as Pancreatic Cancer, Ovarian Cancer or Mesothelioma that also struggle either with a lack of access to drugs or with the need to raise awareness amongst the general public. The fiasco surrounding the NICE appraisal of Azacitidine is an excellent case in point. As many as 1,500 patients will have missed out on the opportunity to have access to Azacitidine by then. Now the mishandling of the evidence by the evaluation team as highlighted by the Appeals Committee has not helped, but the process is long and ponderous even without an appeal. More worryingly, length aside, it is the decision making process itself that is so flawed, especially NICE's refusal to recognise Orphan Drug status. The MDS Forum, the Royal College of Pathology and the British Society for Haematology, who collectively represent the UK's top haematologists, have all written to NICE to highlight the unsuitability of NICE HTAs for assessing orphan medicines. Haematologists from centres of excellence across Europe have also signed a letter echoing this view. Of the 50 orphan status drugs that are licensed by the European Medicines Authority, only 3 have been recommended by NICE. There is an exceptionally strong case for further reform to the NICE process to ensure that it captures the full value to patients with rarer cancers of new and innovative medicines. It is not news that there are problems with the NICE process and that it is unfair to those with rarer cancers. There are extremely high costs associated with the research and development involved with drugs and the relative lack of expertise means that drugs for rarer conditions cost even more. The fact that the drugs are for small patient groups means there are relatively low sales and the unit cost of these drugs is of course very, very high. Yet the innovative value added by these drugs is very great indeed. These are not 'me too' drugs with relatively low incremental clinical improvement to the patient compared to the drug that they replace. They are unique and often provide the only treatment available to the patient. This is exemplified by Azacitidine for MDS where the only alternative is usually 'best supportive care' - treating only the symptoms and not the disease. I do not know why the process cannot be adjusted to take into account Orphan Status, it seems the UK is almost unique in this decision. I am aware that the problems with the NICE process are not unknown. The decision to move to Value Based Pricing and the introduction of end of life criteria and patient access schemes is recognition of these problems. However end of life criteria and patient access schemes have not succeeded in making appraisals more flexible to innovative treatments for rarer cancers, especially ones where the very small number of patients eligible to take part in patient trials means there is often considerable uncertainty surrounding the data. A fascinating example of the current problems with NICE's methodology is that even if Azacitidine was to be given away for free to the patient, its QALY [quality adjusted life year] cost would still be £20,000! Further, Value Based Pricing is over three years away and the details of how the scheme will work will decide how effective it is at addressing the needs of small patient groups. In the meantime, short of further reform of the NICE process, the only option for MDS patients and similarly disadvantaged sufferers of other rare cancers is the Cancer Drugs Fund. Before I move on to the Cancer Drugs Fund I would like to implore the minister to ensure that Value Based Pricing is constructed in such a way that drugs such as Azacitidine do indeed become available to UK citizens, just as they are across the rest of Europe. It is a drug that provides a vast improvement to patient outcomes as opposed to current treatment and it is therefore the very definition of 'high value' that Value Based Pricing must be designed around. I would also like to urge the Department of Health to ensure that the Cancer Drugs Fund is used to help sufferers of cancers such as MDS. MDS is a life-threatening illness and one that is currently terribly served by the NICE process. The only available treatment is currently being denied to patients, and although I do hope that NICE reverses its decision, I fear that ministerial intervention may be needed to bring access to Azacitidine to MDS sufferers. It is exactly the kind of treatment that the Cancer Drugs Fund must provide for. MDS sufferers will, of course, have to wait even longer whilst NICE makes its decision before they are allowed to even apply to the fund. In summing up, I ask that the NICE methodology is reformed to make it more suitable for assessing medicines for rarer cancers or that cancers such as MDS are taken out of the NICE HTA process altogether. I ask that Value Based Pricing is constructed correctly to ensure that innovative drugs with a high benefit to patient outcome such as Azacitidine are correctly appraised. Finally I ask that in the meantime, the Cancer Drugs Fund is used to correct the inequality faced by sufferers of rarer cancers due to the disparity in the appraisal process of drugs for rarer cancers. Published and promoted by Manchester Liberal Democrats, c/o 8 Gawsworth Avenue, M20 5NF Printed (hosted) by Prater Raines Ltd, 98 Sandgate High Street, Folkestone CT20 3BY