Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The New and Non-Transparent Cancer Drugs Fund

  • Commentary
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts. Cancer Drugs Fund—20th Report. Twentieth Report of Session 2015–16. House of Commons; 2016.

  2. Littlejohns P, Weale A, Kieslich K, et al. Challenges for the new Cancer Drugs Fund. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(4):416–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Graham J, Cassidy J, Hughes D, Duerden M. Ring-fencing a budget for cancer drugs: is it fair? J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2011;41(3):224–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Grieve R, Abrams K, Claxton K, et al. Cancer Drugs Fund requires further reform. BMJ. 2016;354:i5090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. NHS England Cancer Drugs Fund Team. Appraisal and Funding of Cancer Drugs from July 2016 (including the New Cancer Drugs Fund). A New Deal for Patients, Taxpayers and Industry. NHS England Cancer Drugs Fund Team; 2016.

  6. NHS England. National Cancer Drugs Fund List Version 1.72, 28 March 2018. NHS England; 2018.

  7. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Consultation paper: value based assessment of health technologies. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  8. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Social value judgements: principles for the development of NICE guidance. 2nd ed. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  9. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the processes of technology appraisal 2018. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2018. p. 1–104.

  10. Bullement A, Taylor M, McMordie ST, Waters E, Hatswell AJ. NICE, in confidence: an assessment of redaction to obscure confidential information in single technology appraisals by the national institute for health and care excellence. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(11):1383–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Health Policy Watch. Medicine prices: secrecy of R&D costs remains issue in Near-Final World Health Assembly Resolution. Health Policy Watch; 2019. https://www.healthpolicy-watch.org/medicines-prices-secrecy-of-rd-costs-remains-issue-in-nearly-final-wha-resolution/. Accessed 2 June 2019.

  12. NHS England. Cancer drugs fund (CDF) activity update Q4 2017–2018.

  13. NHS Digital. Prescribing costs in hospitals and the community, England 2017/18. NHS; 2018.

  14. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Pembrolizumab for treating PDL1- positive non-small-cell lung cancer after chemotherapy. technology appraisal guidance TA428 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 11 Jan 2017.

  15. Morrell L, Wordsworth S, Schuh A, Middleton MR, Rees S, Barker RW. Will the reformed Cancer Drugs Fund address the most common types of uncertainty? An analysis of NICE cancer drug appraisals. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2013. pp. 1–93.

  17. Department of Health and Social Care. 2018 Statutory scheme-branded medicines pricing impact assessment. 2018. http://qna.files.parliament.uk/qna-attachments/980149/original/2018_Statutory_Scheme_Impact_Assessment_1.pdf. Accessed 2 June 2019.

  18. Collins M, Latimer N. NICE’s end of life decision making scheme: impact on population health. BMJ. 2013;346(7905):f1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Department of Health and Social Care. The Handbook to the NHS Constitution for England. Department of Health and Social Care; 2019.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Ardudwy, Holyhead Road, Bangor, LL57 2PZ, UK

    Eifiona M. Wood & Dyfrig A. Hughes

Authors
  1. Eifiona M. Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dyfrig A. Hughes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

EW and DH made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work, and the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data; drafted the work and revised it critically for important intellectual content; approved the version to be published; and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dyfrig A. Hughes.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

Eifiona Wood and Dyfrig Hughes declare they have no conflicts of interest.

Funding

Dyfrig Hughes is a Senior Research Leader at Health and Care Research Wales.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wood, E.M., Hughes, D.A. The New and Non-Transparent Cancer Drugs Fund. PharmacoEconomics 38, 1–4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-019-00871-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-019-00871-9

Search

Navigation