NHS advised not to fund kidney cancer drugs
PATIENTS with advanced kidney cancer will be denied four treatments on the NHS under new guidelines published today.
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) issued draft guidance rejecting a bid to ensure drugs Sutent, Avastin, Nexavar and Torisel are available to all patients on the NHS.
It is a devastating blow to Jack Rosser, 56, of Kingswood, who was diagnosed with kidney cancer three days after daughter, Emma, was born last July. He said Sutent was his only hope of seeing his Emma go to school.
On Tuesday he lost his appeal against South Gloucestershire Primary Care Trust's decision not to pay for the drug.
PCTs can decide to fund expensive drugs in "exceptional" cases but now Nice has issued draft guidance on the four treatments, patients with advanced kidney cancer are unlikely to get them unless they pay for them themselves.
If the drugs had been approved, all PCTs would have been obliged to pay for them.
Mr Rosser has been without active treatment for six months.
His wife Jenny said: "I couldn't stop crying when the PCT phoned us with the decision. They said Jack was no different to any other patient with advanced kidney cancer.
"All we want is for Jack to be able to have a drug to enable him to fight the disease.
"They are saying that his life is not worth £30,000. We are all completely devastated.
"They would not listen to our arguments, that Jack has a right to life.
"They are sending him home to die – it's tantamount to murder.
"I hold them responsible."
Mr Rosser, who served in the Royal Navy for nine years, was diagnosed after he went to his doctor about what he believed was "a popped rib".
A scan found a tumour in his kidney and the pain was caused by the cancer spreading to his bones.
Last month the Evening Post told how another patient, 55-year-old Gary Humphries, from Knowle, won an appeal for Sutent.
Patients already on the drugs can continue to receive them until they and their doctors consider it appropriate to stop, the Nice guidance says.
Another kidney cancer patient, Robert Derrick, of Charfield, recently told the Post he was considering selling his vintage motorbike collection to pay for Sutent, which costs £4,000 a month. But NHS rules mean Mr Derrick would have to pay for all his treatment, not just the drugs.
His daughter, Sarah Seeger, said: "The strain of going through the process of trying to get Sutent is worse than the actual diagnosis.
"If my father was in a high- dependency bed no one would question whether it was cost effective to keep him there.
"Lots of people need medical help that costs more than £4,000 a month. I can't believe this is the way we treat cancer patients in this country."
Charities have expressed outrage at the guidelines, saying it left patients only one option – interferon – to which many do not respond.
The guidance, which is subject to appeal, says the drugs are not cost effective for advanced kidney cancer patients.
Professor Peter Littlejohns, clinical and public health director at Nice, said: "The decisions Nice has to make are some of the hardest in public life. NHS resources are not limitless and Nice has to decide what treatments represent best value to the patient as well as the NHS."
23 Comments
View all
by suelewis, bristol
Monday, August 11 2008, 12:23PM
“i suggest all mp's give up their little perks ie john lewis shopping list gardiners second homes then nice will have enough money to pay for jacks treatment and everyone else. Tash i think you missed a vital point such as human beings are also animals who are ascension beings which most other animals are not. Why can't ur passion also include our species instead of being insulting towards Jack and his family and namely my daughter Hazel who you made fun of. I feel you have been extremely insensitive over this whole situation & missed the point.”
by Jenny Rosser, Bristol
Monday, August 11 2008, 12:09PM
“I felt compelled to make a comment after reading Tash's distracting comments about cruelty to animals, when the focus of the story regarding my husband was about nice decision. Whilst i acknowledge cruelty to animals is unacceptable this was not about cancer charities using animals as guinea pigs. I'd also be interested to know your sources of information to back up your claims Peiffer uses animals to test their medications. I'm sure they'd be interested in your allegations. I'm sorry you have lost loved ones to cancers but i really do object in you thinking the animals lives are more valuable over not only your own family but my husbands too. Who do you think you are!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
by Tash, Bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 3:50PM
“Hazel if you read my previous comments you will see that yes, I have lost family to cancer. If you want to believe that it is correct to inflict excrutiating pain on defenceless animals all in the name of medical research then go ahead, you do that. I hope you too sleep peacefully tonight knowing that some poor animal is dying an awful death just so the likes of you and me can live. I don't apologise for thinking its not fair.”
by hazel allen, bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 3:39PM
“tash you really are a joke! if you have lost people you love you would understand where im coming from. but thanks for your comments im sure jenny will sleep alot easier at night knowing that.”
by Tash, Bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 3:23PM
“I think you are overreacting a bit here Hazel. Animals have also lost their brothers, sisters, children and parents but you don't seem to care less. Animals are put through appalling tests which are painful and which leaves them in excrutiating pain. Just so the likes of you and I can have medication. Where is the justification in that?”
by hazel allen, bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 3:00PM
“sorry tash, jack,jenny or emma dont really care what the weather is like or what its going to be like in the forthcoming days! jenny would just like to have her husband and emma would like her dad to be around for alot longer. so sorry but i couldnt care less if animals were tested on or not for cancer medication or soap! i just feel for a family who have been torn apart becuase of this decision.”
by Tash, Bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 2:36PM
“I haven't discussed the weather Hazel, although it is rather pleasant outside today. Make the most of it though because heavy showers are predicted tomorrow, with drier conditions on Sunday - albeit a bit cloudy.
I think my comments are relevant because it came up, if you scroll down the page to previous comments, regarding the funding of cancer research. What I said was that I would not give money to cancer research because they did their research on defenceless animals. So I think my comments are 100% relevant to the above story.”
by hazel allen, bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 2:29PM
“tash i do apologise i thought this was a forum to discuss the above issue. not weather or not products are tested on animals.”
by Tash, Bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 2:13PM
“Hazel, this is a forum for expressing opinions. If you don't agree with what has been said then that's not my problem.”
by hazel allen, bristol
Friday, August 08 2008, 2:04PM
“i think you are getting away from the real issues here! its not weather animals get tested on or not! if you want to discuss that go to the rspca website! the main issue is that a guy has paid his taxes and ni for the past 30years and this is his reward!”