Another Voice / Health care
British system discourages availability of new drugs
Updated: 07/26/08 5:44 AM
Experimental cures are often the last hope for dying patients in the U. K. health system. Thanks to the British government, however, many sick Britons will soon have their last hopes dashed.
Why? Pharmaceutical companies from around the world have been scaling back clinical research in the United Kingdom, largely because of government parsimony. And British citizens have paid the price.
Britain’s National Health Service seems to have made Britain inhospitable to new drug research. By covering only the lowest-cost treatment options and denying patients access to more expensive breakthrough drugs, the NHS has erected serious roadblocks for companies trying to develop new cures.
The main culprit is Britain’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the government agency responsible for comparing the effectiveness of different treatment options. Using the institute’s studies, the British government determines which treatments to cover and which ones aren’t worth the cost.
When the NHS decides not to cover a drug — as happened recently with the new macular degeneration drug Avastin — it hinders the ability of drug companies to recoup research and development expenses. That means less money for research into tomorrow’s cures.
Such practices don’t just fleece pharmaceutical research firms; they also make British patients less-than-appealing subjects for clinical trials.
Think about it. You wouldn’t want to conduct a taste-test of a new soft drink by giving one test group the new beverage and another group a warm glass of tap water. Obviously those who tasted the soda would react better. Similarly, comparing an experimental cancer drug to the low-quality treatments that many in Britain receive won’t reveal how effective the new drug is.
That’s why Avastin’s manufacturer has already canceled participation in four clinical trials of the drug in Britain. The company wasn’t able to find patients who were already receiving the “gold-standard” treatment necessary for comparison. Two major European drugmakers have also cut back the number of British patients in their clinical trials.
Luckily, many Britons are beginning to fight back. Among them is Dorothy Griffiths, a breast-cancer patient who organized the advocacy group “Fighting for Herceptin” in July 2005, after the institute denied her the life-prolonging cancer drug. She finally gained access to it after lobbying Parliament to overrule the institute’s initial judgment.
With health care reform in America at the top of the agenda this election season, it’s more important than ever that we be aware of the dangers of government- run health care. America should avoid Britain’s mistakes and make sure we keep the interests — and hopes — of patients first in our pursuit of reform.
Peter J. Pitts is president of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest and a former FDA associate commissioner.
