read at your own peril--UK NHS trying to redirect money spent on herceptin

[Lani]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7115540.stm

[tricia keegan]

Thanks Lani, I actually just saw this report on the BBC news about an hour ago where it got the headline and my heart sank. This kind of report no one needs, in an ideal world there'd be money for both but the 500 patients it has helped may be dead today without it.
I recall the fight some of th eladies in the Uk had, during treatments to secure herceptin and hope this does'nt change the situation for them.

[Christine MH-UK]

I had hoped that that study indicating that herceptin was cost effective because it not only saved some lives but also lessened the need for secondary care would have closed this issue for good. Apparently not. Still, if the science behind the study indicating that herceptin saves money was good, then there is a chance that this issue can be put to rest.

I still think that herceptin only during chemo deserves further trialing, and not just because it would make herceptin affordable to many more people/countries. I have had alot of IBC and stage III acquaintances not make it on the HERA trial protocol, so was impressed that Hurley in Miami managed a fairly high four-year disease free survival rate for these high risk groups using a treatment in which herceptin was only given with chemo. It was a small study, but statistically the DFS rate was unlikely to be less than two-thirds, which is alot better than my acquaintances has done. (My husband once asked me 'Are any of your friends making it?' during a particularly grim period).

So, there are potential short run and long-run solutions.

Best wishes,

Christine

[Christine MH-UK]

Does anybody remember that study besides me? I know that I saw it on here somewhere, but I just can't find it. It was the one that said that herceptin added a year to DFS survival even when it didn't work and saved money by shortening stage IV even when it didn't work. Just can't find it and I know it is important.

[fullofbeans]

hi all, again thanks for bringing this up. Christine I cannot rememnebr seeing the study you mention but yep would be good.

Anyhow I have just sent this email to the guy with the poor suggestion.


Dear Dr Kirkbride,
I understand that you have recently commented on the redirecting money from new therapeutic drug such as Herceptin.

I find your view extremely disturbing. Herceptin and the myriad of other Her targeted pathways in development offers a lot of hope for thousands of woman. Just as radiotherapy has its role so does immunotherapy it is not and should not be one or the other.

According to the latest Eurocare study there is a 16% variation in the 10 years survival rate between France and the UK. However France spend the same amount of money per cancer patient but have the latest available drugs free of charge.

I am a 35 y/o metastatic BC patient currently in remission and grateful for herceptin.

Disallowing patient with aggressive cancer access to what is now a conventional drug is in my opinion a very narrow minded way of thinking. I cannot think of a single oncologist that would not prescribe Herceptin to their daughter if she was Her2 +, as I am sure you would.

Considering that the UK GDP is one of the highest in Europe how can someone think in such term? Radiotherapy is important but so are new drugs it is not either or are often a combination of treatments are required. The number you quote is that patient benefiting cost £200k /year. I understand that MP beyond their salary cost £118k/year in various expenses. Cutting off Herceptin on the basis of cost in a rich country like the UK sound like a policy a crooked African country would adopt. Denying the chance to these people is a statement you should understand the weight of.

Best wishes
Karina