Published on 7 May 2014

NHS forced into emergency action to fund ‘game-changing’ Hep C drug

Channel 4 News understands that NHS England has taken the unusual step of setting up an emergency access scheme for a new hepatitis C drug  after plans for fast track funding were delayed.

Three weeks ago,  we revealed that NHS England had agreed to early funding of the drug, Sofosbuvir, for 500 patients with a severe form of the disease who were otherwise likely to die or to need a liver transplant within a year.

However,  no patient has yet received the drug after it emerged that NHS England had not worked out a procedure for moving the funding to the doctors who wanted to prescribe the drug.

Now after pressure from consultants and the Hepatitis C Trust,  NHS England has agreed to the emergency scheme for the most desperately ill of those 500 patients.  We have been told that the funding will reach doctors by Monday.

In our  piece three weeks ago, we interviewed Nils Nordal, of Oxford, who contracted the disease following dental treatment in Egypt 20 years ago.

Pre News refresh player – this is the default player for the C4 news site – please do not delete. Ziad

 

 


Since then, Mr Nordal’s condition has deteriorated.  Rather than wait for NHS England to work out the funding problems, his doctors have now gone straight to the drug company, Gilead.

Mr Nordal’s consultant, Dr Ellie Barnes, said that Gilead had agreed to supply the drug and Mr Nordal should be able to begin the treatment on Friday.

Dr Barnes said Gilead had acted somewhat on faith, on the understanding that Mr Nordal’s name would be on the emergency funding list.

Breakthrough treatment

The drug has been hailed as a “game changer” because it has a 90 to 95 per cent cure rate, can prevent the need for transplant and has almost no side effects.

Until now, there have been few options for people with the advanced effects of hepatitis C except a liver transplant.

The current drug regime, using interferon, with other drugs such as ribavirin, cannot always be tolerated by those with the more serious form of the disease.

Even for those who can take it,  the regime has serious side-effects and is not, more crucially, a cure.

Mr Nordal has now been assessed for a liver transplant and it is not clear whether the drug will prevent that operation from having to go ahead.

There is some evidence that the drug can reverse some of the damage to the liver caused by the disease, although no studies have been done on patients as seriously ill as Mr Nordal.  And there is also evidence that the number of days that a patient is virus-free before a transplant increases the likelihood that the virus will not attack the new liver.

Dr Barnes said that in these cases, “days matter” when it comes to getting the treatment to the patient.

Bureaucratic delays

Consultants have welcomed the fact that funding was agreed by NHS England, but criticism and frustration will escalate if the funding process is not streamlined over the coming days as promised.

It appears, though, that the organisation may have fallen foul of the “any qualified provider” rules introduced under the NHS reforms that insist that processes like this are put out to tender.

This means that although it was agreed 15 centres should be responsible for getting the drug to the patients, private providers – who probably have no interest in being involved – still had to be given the opportunity to be part of the process.

One consultant told Channel 4 News that it was an “appalling system” that meant NHS England had been forced to make the early access scheme up as it went along.

The early funding was agreed, after a three month process, because it was recognised that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) would not be able to evaluate the drug quickly enough for the most seriously ill.

The drug is expensive – £35,000 for a 12 week course.  But when compared with the need for a liver transplant, followed by a  lifetime of drugs, it becomes highly cost-effective.

Follow @vsmacdonald on Twitter

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article topics

Tweets by @vsmacdonald

2 reader comments

  1. Richard C Brown says:

    This is one of the areas that not only national health care systems need to address, but rather it needs be addressed on an international scale. Public funding for assistance in R & D is essential to reducing the costs of drugs that can save lives, and in this case, money. The savings is not only for the individual involved, but rather for the healthcare system. It is sad that not only is the United States lagging far behind the rest of the developed world in providing healthcare, but also that there is such a highly organized political attack on a newly formed process to obtain such a program. Having personally lived and worked in Europe, I have first-hand knowledge of the benefits.

    To reduce the costs to healthcare providers and therefore patients, an international system needs to be developed to provide drugs at a reasonable cost.

  2. Jim Wilson says:

    I am a retired pharmacist and a former sales representative for the company who sold interfero. I was diagnosed with HepC in 1999 after a routine exam found elevated liver enzymes & liver biopsy found cirrhosis. My disease was traced back to 1975, when I suffered from a post blood transfusion acute infection that was called Non-A/Non-B Hepatitis. More than 30 years later, in 2006, I received a liver transplant after two failed treatments of Interferon/Ribavirin between 1999 & 2005.

    I received my third failed treatment with Pegasys & Ribavirin was in 2008 and I ended up in the hospital with severe anemia and required 12 blood transfusions. Between 1999 & 2008, my healthcare costs were covered mostly by commercial insurance to the tune of $750,000 or more, with the transplant costing $500,000 plus.

    In 2012, I was denied treatment with Telapravir due to my post liver transplant status & potential severe drug interactions with Prograf. I was referred by my liver specialist for a clinical trial of Sofosbuvir & Ledipaspir plus Ribavirin in 400 severe cirrhotic & post liver transplant patients nationwide. After only two weeks of taking four pills in the morning and three in the evening, the virus was UNDETECTABLE! Just recently, I was informed that I am cured of the virus after being undetectable at the post 12 week level (SVR12). Because I was in a clinical trial, I was not charged for my cure.

    Considering that the new treatment costs $1,000 to $1,500 per day for 12 weeks, or a total of $85-$100k, it is still a lot less than the costs related to the many failures associated with interferon & Ribavirin and certainly a lot less than the cost of my liver transplant ($500K+). What is most disappointing to me and to others who are/were suffering from this virus, is that anyone would be required to wait another day to be cured. It’s like telling someone suffering from a heart attack that they must wait.

Comments are closed.