For the boys

Obviously it's important to campaign to raise awareness of male cancers too.

Too much to ask (2)

Really shouldn't still be blogging - it's 1.30am and I have to attend the Bristol's Got Talent event at the Felix Road adventure playground tomorrow - but this caught my eye from tomorrow's (today's) Observer. "Kidney cancer drugs could be produced for about a tenth of their current cost".

I was emailed a couple of days ago from the constituent who'd successfully won his appeal to be prescribed Sutent on the NHS; he's doing really well already, putting on weight, feeling much better (see The drugs don't work - not a statement of opinion on my part, I just couldn't think of another vaguely relevant song title at the time).

Too much to ask

Breaking news from the Guardian... which doesn't particularly surprise me where Bristol is concerned, but it's very useful to have the figures with which to confirm my suspicions. Although it doesn't necessarily mean that the PCTs who turned down appeals are in the wrong; NICE is there for a purpose, and generally I would back its decisions. But I see its role primarily as ensuring that public money doesn't get wasted on virtually useless products being pushed by big pharmaceutical companies. It gets more difficult when there is clear proof that the drug does have some positive effect, but it comes down to a cost-benefit-analysis, which is roughly based on cost of the drug cf. additional years of quality life. How do you decide whether giving someone an average six months extra is worth £30,000?

The PCT exceptional funding appeals panels are meant to look not at whether someone's personal circumstances are exceptional, but whether their potential response to treatment sets them apart from other applicants. So it's not about whether you've got young children, or have led a blameless life, or whatever (which would get you into very difficult territory); it's about whether you're likely to live longer, respond better, etc. (Correct me if I'm wrong on that, someone).

I had one constituent recently who appealed successfully against being refused the kidney cancer drug Sutent - see my The Drugs Don't Work post from July, and no I didn't really mean that the drugs don't work as one email correspondent thought. On Friday however I was visited at my surgery by another constituent whose father has kidney cancer and is being denied Sutent. The family are faced with selling their belongings to try to fund the drug privately. They could also fall foul of the ridiculous NHS co-payment guidelines, which basically mean that if you pay for the drugs privately, you have to pay for everything privately. (We're doing something about that, thank God, although it won't come quickly enough for my constituent's father.)

Although my constituent's father doesn't live in Bristol, I've said I'll do what I can to support his appeal, along with his own MP. I'm not sure we'll succeed this time, given the NICE interim guidelines. But how do you tell someone what price you think should be put on a year of her father's life?

The drugs don't work

Or do they?

Not difficult to think of a good news story today. Those of you who saw yesterday's Evening Post will have read about the case of Gary Humphries and his battle to get the PCT to give him the drug he hopes will help him fight kidney cancer. Gary came to see me at my surgery a few weeks ago, and has just emailed to tell me that today's appeal was successful! Great news, and I hope he responds well to treatment.

Also worth reminding people that earlier this week the Government announced a fundamental review of the way NICE works, and an end to the postcode lottery. Would have been too late for Gary, but the PCT's decision today may well have been made with that in mind.