Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Analysis And Comment Rationing

How much will Herceptin really cost?

BMJ 2006; 333 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39008.624051.BE (Published 23 November 2006) Cite this as: BMJ 2006;333:1118

Rapid Response:

NICE saves money too

The discomboluting article by Barret et al. provides a striking
analysis of the herceptin situation. However, they fail to point out that
NICE does already help to free up additional funds by advising against the
use of inneffective treatments such as their recent guidance on the use of
drugs in early dementia treatment. Ideally many more historical and modern
treatments would go through the NICE process as a way of ridding the NHS
of innefficient treatments. The remitt of NICE is surely to provide state-
of-the-art guidance on cost-effective best practice and not to allocate
resources per se.
Barrett et al whilst criticising the media's sentimental overstatement of
Herceptin's benefits, also hyperbolize their own illogical case for
rationing proven cancer treatments. The outcome of their own reasoning
suggests that should they be faced with the dilemma of having to cut a
cancer treatment, they would be rescued by the resultant media outcry.

Competing interests:
None declared

Competing interests: No competing interests

30 November 2006
Michael E Reschen
SHO Oncology
John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU