Is the new NICE appraisal process for oncology indications too positive in its assessment of cancer drugs in England?

Since 29 July 2016, the NICE appraisal process for oncology indications in England has been modified to allow one of three outcomes; recommended for routine use, not recommended, or recommended within the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) managed access scheme. This study investigates the outcomes of NICE appraisals for new cancer drugs assessed via the modified process.

Read our findings here…… (Is the new NICE appraisal process too positive?)

By |2018-10-19T15:05:25+00:00October 19th, 2018|Publications|0 Comments

CSL Behring lung drug would cost NHS £8m per patient

NICE has rejected CSL Behring’s alpha1-proteinase inhibitor Respreeza for treating genetic emphysema in draft guidance, saying that it would cost a massive £8 million to give a patient a year of quality life with the treatment.

NHS England’s cost-effectiveness watchdog, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), issued a first draft document saying that it did not currently recommend the drug.

Read the full article by Joy Persaud here


By |2018-10-09T07:52:47+00:00October 9th, 2018|News|0 Comments

Our 5th abstract which has been accepted for ISPOR EU 2018!

What are the key considerations for seeking payer scientific advice in the EU?


Within the EU there are multiple payer scientific advice options pharmaceutical companies can take to understand payers’ clinical and economic HTA evidence requirements. The aim of this study is to compare the key aspects companies must consider when seeking payer scientific advice.


Secondary research was conducted to identify the payer scientific advice processes at NICE, G-BA, HAS, AIFA and the parallel consultation with the EMA and HTA bodies. The timelines, submission requirements, scope of advice and fees for each procedure were then compared and contrasted.


Major differences between payer scientific advice procedures were identified. The G-BA and NICE’s Office of Market Access have the shortest timelines, providing advice within 10 – 14 weeks, whilst NICE’s scientific advice and EMA’s parallel consultation take 24 – 34 weeks. The G-BA require the fewest submission materials; in contrast, the […]

By |2018-09-27T09:28:14+00:00September 27th, 2018|News|0 Comments

A 4th abstract has been accepted for ISPOR EU 2018

Has the new NICE appraisal process for oncology drugs delivered faster patient access to innovative treatments?


Since 29 July 2016, NICE has employed a new fast-track appraisal process for oncology drugs. The new approach aims for draft guidance to be published prior to market authorisation (MA) in the form of an Appraisal Consultation Document (ACD), and a Final Appraisal Determination (FAD) to be published within 90 days of MA. This study investigates whether these targets have been met for new cancer drugs receiving MA post-July 2016.


Publicly available sources were utilised to identify cancer drugs assessed through the new NICE oncology appraisal process (data cut-off 24th April 2018). For each drug, the publication dates of the ACD and FAD were identified, as well as European Medicine Agency MA date. The number of days between the MA date and ACD/FAD publication dates were then calculated. Multiple-technology appraisals, drugs with MA prior to 29 […]

By |2018-09-20T12:16:59+00:00September 20th, 2018|News|0 Comments