A recent breakfast meeting at the Kings Fund discussed the issue of an NHS top-up policy in relation to multifocal lenses in cataract surgery. My contribution from the commissioner perspective involved six points: i) the lenses were dear, adding several hundred pounds to the around £800 NHS cost of a cataract procedure, ii) that they were highly […]
Category: James Raftery’s NICE blogs
James Raftery: Avastin, Lucentis, and NICE
A useful update was provided at a meeting this week sponsored by the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) and Patients Involved in NICE (the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence). As the proceedings are to be written up and published, I focus here on the key points that emerged for me. […]
James Raftery: What does “value based pricing” mean for NICE?
The “value based pricing” consultation paper” makes the following relevant references to the future of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). […]
James Raftery: Value based pricing – the consultation paper
The publication of the Department of Health’s consultation paper on value based pricing and the ongoing consultation on the Cancer Drugs Fund plus each consultation’s accompanying impact assessment mean that it is now possible to see what is being proposed. This blog looks at the essentials of value based pricing; later blogs will deal with […]
James Raftery: What’s happening with NICE? The cancer drugs fund and “value based pricing”
The reports that NICE is to be stripped of its powers to recommend against NHS use of drugs prompts questions about the Coalition Government’s health plans. Some indication of what these might be can be gleaned from the current “Consultation on the cancer drugs fund” and its linked impact assessment. By having to frame the […]
James Raftery: NICE changes its position on Alzheimer’s disease drugs
The provisional guidance from NICE on drugs for Alzheimers’ disease – donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, and memantine – marks a dramatic shift from restricting access to those with moderate disease to recommending these drugs as options for all patients with the disease. What has changed? No new compelling evidence has emerged. For each of the drugs […]
James Raftery on bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer
Roche’s bevacizumab (Avastin) is in the news again. This has a reasonable claim to be a wonder drug, but for macular degeneration, a disease for which Roche refuses to license it. Instead Roche has tried and failed several times to have the drug recommended by NICE for lung, breast, and colorectal cancer, all at an […]
James Raftery: NICE – the beginning of the end—or a new beginning?
The coalition programme for government states: “We will create a cancer drugs fund to enable patients to access the cancer drugs their doctors think will help them, paid for using money saved by the NHS through our pledge to stop the rise in national insurance contributions from April 2011,” and “We will reform NICE and […]
James Raftery: Bypassing NICE for the sake of innovation?
Recent reports that NICE was to be bypassed by drugs which were “innovative,” with funding from a new separate budget, sent me in search of the source report – the Life Sciences Blueprint, a statement from the Office of Life Sciences . […]
James Raftery on the Kennedy report
” Appraising the value of innovation and other benefits: a short study for NICE, ” the report by Sir Ian Kennedy contains one of the best critiques of the new buzz word “innovation” but perversely goes some way to recommending it be included in cost effectiveness. […]