Call for more transparency in way NICE makes drug recommendations
The UK"s National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) has been rapped by the High Court for not releasing the economic model on which it based its decision to restrict access to Protelos (strontium ranelate). The judge has not yet taken a decision on whether the guidance will be quashed.
The UK’s National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) has been rapped by the High Court for not releasing the economic model on which it based its decision to restrict access to Protelos (strontium ranelate). The judge has not yet taken a decision on whether the guidance will be quashed.
The High Court has instructed NICE to grant access to the economic model to stakeholders, who will be given the opportunity to comment on the assumptions NICE made when developing the guidance. NICE will then be required under its legal duty of transparency to re-evaluate the guidance in light of the comments it receives.
Meanwhile, the Office of Health Economics (OHE) has called for improvements to be made to NICE’s methodology for assessing cancer drugs.
The OHE, in a report commissioned by the Pharmaceutical Oncology Initiative (POI), wants changes to be made to the health-related quality of life measure preferred by NICE (EQ-5D) and an alternative public valuation of health states to reflect the importance of increasing survival and quality of life for patients with a limited life expectancy.
Andrew Curl, chairman of POI, said: ‘The POI believes that every cancer patient in the UK should have a chance of survival comparable to the best in Europe. NICE has declined to recommend some cancer drugs for use in the NHS, which are routinely available elsewhere. If the recommendations within the report are implemented, the benefits to cancer patients in the UK now and in the future would be immense.’