corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 11207

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

NICE Responds to Judicial Review Outcome
PharmaLive 2007 Aug 10
http://pharmalive.com/news/index.cfm?articleID=466840&categoryid=43


Full text:

LONDON, Aug. 10, 2007-Commenting on today’s ruling, NICE Chief Executive, Andrew Dillon said: “The legal challenge to our recommendation that drugs for Alzheimer’s disease should only be prescribed to those in the moderate stage of the disease has failed. We were challenged on six grounds, and the court found in our favour on five of them. This ruling strengthens NICE by endorsing our approach to evaluating drugs.

“Our guidance stands and the drugs continue to be recommended only for people with moderate Alzheimer’s disease, but the court has asked us to clarify our guidance when it is used for certain groups. It was always our intention that people with learning disabilities or people whose first language is not English should have equal access to the drugs in the moderate stage of Alzheimer’s disease. We will reissue our guidance to the NHS to make this crystal clear.

“Alzheimer’s disease is a devastating illness, but the evidence indicates that these drugs are simply not effective for some patients. That is why we also issued advice last year on the broader support that should be provided for people with Alzheimer’s disease and those who care for them, creating core standards for the NHS and care homes that will make a real difference for patients and their families.”

The judge ruled in favour of NICE on five out of the six grounds bought in court, including finding:

• That NICE did appropriately take into account the benefits these drugs bring to carers.
• That NICE appropriately reflected the costs of long term care in its calculations.
• That NICE did not breach principles of procedural fairness by providing a ‘read only’ version of the economic model.
• That NICE was not irrational in concluding that there is no cumulative benefit to patients after six months treatment with these drugs.
• That NICE’s assessment and consideration of the AD 2000 study was not irrational.

The judge ruled against NICE on one of the six grounds bought in court:
• That NICE did breach its duties under the Disability Discrimination Act and the Race Relations Act by not offering specific advice regarding people with learning disabilities and people for whom English is not their first language in its technology appraisal guidance.

NICE will be sending out an updated press release shortly with details of how the Institute will implement the court’s ruling.

Ends

Notes to Editors

About NICE

1. More information on the appraisal of drugs for Alzheimer’s disease can be found on the NICE website at http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA111.

2. NICE did offer specific advice on prescribing drugs for Alzheimer’s disease for people with learning disabilities and people for whom English is not their first language in the clinical guideline on dementia that was jointly issued by NICE and the Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) in November 2007. More information on the dementia guideline can be found on the NICE website at: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/cg42.

3. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is the independent organisation responsible for providing national guidance on the promotion of good health and the prevention and treatment of ill health.

4. NICE produces guidance in three areas of health:
• public health – guidance on the promotion of good health and the prevention of ill health for those working in the NHS, local authorities and the wider public and voluntary sector
• health technologies – guidance on the use of new and existing medicines, treatments and procedures within the NHS
• clinical practice – guidance on the appropriate treatment and care of people with specific diseases and conditions within the NHS.

Tel: 020 7067 5900

www.nice.org.uk

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909