Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to procure extended half-life blood clotting factor products for use in the NHS.
Answered by George Freeman
The Department plans to tender for extended half-life Clotting Factor VIII and Factor IX for use in the National Health Service once the products are granted European Union licences and are commercially available.
NHS England has made no decision at this time to whether it will develop a clinical commissioning policy for extended half-life productsbut, through the Clinical Reference Group and discussion with the Department’s Commercial Medicines Unit, will continue to review commissioning of these extended half-life products in the future.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if NHS England will develop a clinical commissioning policy on the use of extended half-life blood clotting factor products in people with haemophilia.
Answered by George Freeman
The Department plans to tender for extended half-life Clotting Factor VIII and Factor IX for use in the National Health Service once the products are granted European Union licences and are commercially available.
NHS England has made no decision at this time to whether it will develop a clinical commissioning policy for extended half-life productsbut, through the Clinical Reference Group and discussion with the Department’s Commercial Medicines Unit, will continue to review commissioning of these extended half-life products in the future.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the National Planning Policy Framework in addressing the housing needs of disabled people.
Answered by Lord Wharton of Yarm
Planning authorities are required to plan for a mix of housing to cater for the needs of different groups in their communities, including people with disabilities. The Government has an ongoing dialogue with a range of stakeholders to assess the effectiveness of the Framework.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 20 June 2015 to Question 3515, what assessment he has made of the affordability to the NHS of providing screening tests for (a) sickle cell disease, (b) cystic fibrosis, (c) congenital hypothyroidism, (d) phenylketonuria, (e) medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency, (f) maple syrup urine disease, (g) isovaleric acidaemia, (h) glutaric aciduria type 1 and (i) homocystinuria (pyridoxine unresponsive); what suppliers are used by the NHS to provide each such test; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Ben Gummer
The NHS Newborn Bloodspot Screening Programme is directly commissioned by NHS England as part of the Section 7A agreement of the National Health Service Act (2006), as amended by the Health and Social Care Act (2012). It sets out the arrangements under which the Secretary of State for Health delegates to NHS England the responsibility for certain elements of Public Health functions. The affordability of the NHS Newborn Bloodspot Screening Programme is discussed with NHS England as part of the Section 7A agreement.
Information on suppliers used by the NHS is not held centrally.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 20 June 2015 to Question 3515, what evidence on costs the NHS considers before deciding to offer screening for genetic conditions; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Jane Ellison
The UK National Screening Committee is the national advisory body, which advises Ministers and the National Health Service on all aspects of screening. It makes recommendations on which screening programmes should or should not be introduced based on robust analysis against a set of internationally recognised criteria. Screening should only be introduced where there is evidence that it will be both clinically and cost effective and do more good than harm. The economic evidence supporting the January 2015 expansion of the Newborn Blood Spot Screening Programme to include four new genetic conditions can be found at the following link:
http://www.screening.nhs.uk/policydb_download.php?doc=398
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the annual cost to the NHS is of providing screening for (a) sickle cell disease, (b) cystic fibrosis, (c) congenital hypothyroidism, (d) phenylketonuria, (e) medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency, (f) maple syrup urine disease, (g) isovaleric acidaemia, (h) glutaric aciduria type 1, and (i) homocystinuria (pyridoxine unresponsive) (i) in total and (ii) on average per each test delivered; and how many such tests were undertaken in the latest year for which figures are available.
Answered by Jane Ellison
Data on the annual cost to the National Health Service of providing screening for sickle cell disease (SCD), cystic fibrosis (CF), congenital hypothyroidism (CHT), phenylketonuria (PKU), medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency (MCADD), maple syrup urine disease (MSUD), isovaleric acidaemia (IVA), glutaric aciduria type 1 (GA1) and homocystinuria (pyridoxine unresponsive)(HCU) are not held centrally.
From Public Health England data, the following number of tests were undertaken in England in 2014/15:
| Number tested for PKU | Number of babies tested for CHT | Number of babies tested for CF | Number of babies tested for MCADD | Number of babies tested for SCD | |
England | 673,328 | 673,233 | 671,120 | 672,107 | 668,117 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
No data is available for MSUD, IVA, GA1A and HCU as screening was not routinely offered until January 2015.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the (a) names and (b) positions are of all members of NHS England's (i) Clinical Priorities Advisory Group, (ii) Specialised Commissioning Oversight Group and (iii) Specialised Commissioning Committee.
Answered by George Freeman
A list of the names and positons of all members of NHS England’s Clinical Priorities Advisory Group, Specialised Commissioning Oversight Group and Specialised Commissioning Committee has been attached to this answer.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what his most recent estimate is of the rebate which will be paid to the Exchequer in 2015-16 through the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme; what assessment he has made of the potential effect of greater use of unlicensed medicines for age-related macular degeneration on that rebate; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by George Freeman
The current Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme (PPRS) payment estimate for the United Kingdom in 2015-16 is £995 million, as set out the note that accompanied my Written Statement HCWS90 of 11 December 2014, which is available at:
We have made no assessment of any effect that the use of unlicensed medicines for age-related macular degeneration might have on the level of PPRS payments.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what correspondence his Department has had with NHS England in the last two months on the use of unlicensed treatments for age-related macular degeneration; and if he will place copies of such correspondence in the Library.
Answered by George Freeman
The use of unlicensed medicines to treat wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) has been the subject of discussions between the Department, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and other stakeholders over several years. We can confirm that we have recently received several letters from National Health Service commissioners regarding the unlicensed use of Avastin for the treatment of wet AMD, and a copy of my response is attached. We have also been in contact with the company that manufactures Avastin. We have stressed that clinical commissioning groups’ commissioning policies must respect the European legislation and guidance from the General Medical Council (GMC) and MHRA that prohibits the supply of an unlicensed medicine where a licensed one is available, unless there is a “special need” which means that the unlicensed treatment is better suited to the clinical need of an individual patient.
Recent discussions and correspondence with the MHRA and NHS England relate to the ongoing development of Government policy in this area. In order to maintain the delivery of effective Government, it would not be appropriate to publish information about the contents of these discussions or to place any related correspondence in the Library. Departmental officials have had no recent discussions on the use of unlicensed treatments for the treatment of AMD with the GMC.
Asked by: John Glen (Conservative - Salisbury)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when officials of his Department last discussed unlicensed treatments for age-related macular degeneration with (a) the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and (b) the General Medical Council; what the content of those discussions was; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by George Freeman
The use of unlicensed medicines to treat wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) has been the subject of discussions between the Department, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and other stakeholders over several years. We can confirm that we have recently received several letters from National Health Service commissioners regarding the unlicensed use of Avastin for the treatment of wet AMD, and a copy of my response is attached. We have also been in contact with the company that manufactures Avastin. We have stressed that clinical commissioning groups’ commissioning policies must respect the European legislation and guidance from the General Medical Council (GMC) and MHRA that prohibits the supply of an unlicensed medicine where a licensed one is available, unless there is a “special need” which means that the unlicensed treatment is better suited to the clinical need of an individual patient.
Recent discussions and correspondence with the MHRA and NHS England relate to the ongoing development of Government policy in this area. In order to maintain the delivery of effective Government, it would not be appropriate to publish information about the contents of these discussions or to place any related correspondence in the Library. Departmental officials have had no recent discussions on the use of unlicensed treatments for the treatment of AMD with the GMC.