Rejection of Alzheimer's drug for use in Scotland is 'devastating blow'
A new Alzheimer's drug has been rejected for use on the NHS in Scotland – with campaigners insisting the decision is a 'devastating blow' for those affected by the condition.
The head of the charity Alzheimer Scotland spoke out after the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) announced it would not recommend donanemab, also known under the brand name Kisunla, for use by NHS Scotland.
The decision comes after UK's medicines regulator said in October that the drug could be licensed for use in the UK.
However, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) has already refused to grant approval for it to be used by the health service in England.
SMC chair Dr Scott Muir said it had 'welcomed the submission for donanemab and recognises the need for new therapies for Alzheimer's disease'.
But he added: 'However, having carefully considered all the evidence, the committee was unable to accept donanemab for treatment in the NHS in Scotland.'
Dr Muir said the SMC 'considered that there remains uncertainty around what the modest clinical benefit means for patients and their families'.
It comes three months after the SMC similarly decided not to recommend another Alzheimer's drug, lecanemab, known under the brand name Leqembi, for use on the NHS, with the organisation saying then there was 'uncertainty' around the 'modest clinical benefit' it could bring patients.
In the wake of those decisions, Henry Simmons, chief executive of the charity Alzheimer Scotland, said there needs to be a change in the system used for assessing such drugs – and suggested a dementia drugs fund be set up to 'finally tackle the UK's biggest killer head-on'
Mr Simmons insisted: 'It's our view that the system used to assess dementia drugs must change if we have any hope of tackling this disease.'
He described the SMC's decision to not recommend donanemab as being 'yet another devastating blow for people living with dementia, their families and carers'
He said while there was an 'established assessment process' for determining what new treatments can be used by the NHS, drugs such as 'donanemab' are 'extremely new'.
Calling for the assessment process to change for dementia treatments, he added: 'Dementia is the UK's biggest killer, and the leading cause of death for women.
'More than 75,000 people die from this disease every year – and yet we still don't have either of the promising new treatments that have been approved in the past year available on the NHS.
'Donanemab is the second disease-modifying drug, after lecanemab, to be approved as safe. Both have been shown to slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease by as much as two years in some cases.
'But we seem to be stuck in a vicious cycle where each time a new drug is assessed, the regulator states that the evidence provided by the company on how well the medicine works, along with how much it would cost to use it, was not strong enough.
'It is time to take a different approach to the way dementia drugs are assessed for NHS use – one that takes into account the sheer size and scale of this disease and the enormous impact it has on the lives of individuals, their families and carers.'
The Alzheimer Scotland boss said: 'There is a special case to be made here for dementia treatments to be supported by alternative forms of funding from governments to get these treatments into the NHS and into the hands of those who need it most.
'In the same way that the Innovative Medicines Fund or Cancer Drugs Fund provide access to treatments deemed too costly for the NHS, we believe it is time to set up a Dementia Drugs Fund to finally tackle the UK's biggest killer head-on.'
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
25 minutes ago
- Daily Record
NHS Dumfries and Galloway predicts budget burst of £28 million in 2025/26 financial year
The overspend is down from the £33.6 million previously expected and includes £21.7 million of cuts. The financial picture of Dumfries and Galloway's healthboard is improving ... but not enough to win approval from the Scottish Government. A report for Monday's board meeting of NHS Dumfries and Galloway revealed an overspend of £28 million is expected in the current financial year. That's down from the £33.6 million prediction at the last meeting. However, the Scottish Government has set a target of a £25 million overspend. Finance boss Katy Kerr's report states the previous draft plan, submitted at the end of March, was not approved. And while 'additional Scottish Government funding' and 'local improvements' have led to the expected overspend being brought down, it still does not meet the requirements of Scottish Ministers. The previous meeting was told that, as things stood, NHS Dumfries and Galloway was due to overspend by £95 million over the next three years. That position has been improved, with the budget burst now expected to be around £87.5 million. That includes £66.7 million worth of savings over the same period. Ms Kerr reported that more than 50 savings schemes worth around £15 million have been found for the current financial year. The savings target is £21.6 million – more than the record £20.1 million the health board saved last year. Members approved the financial recovery plan on Monday and chief executive, Julie White, said: 'This past year's savings have been hard-won, delivered through changes to financial controls, service reviews and transformation which have impacted the way we work right across oursystem. 'But we're now in a position where we have to go further, and faster. 'The next phase of recovery will be even more difficult, and it will require difficult decisions. 'To deliver the level of savings required, we will have to become more efficient and consider further changes to the way in which we deliverservices. 'We will, however, continue to focus on delivering improvements to our performance, particularly our waiting times for planned and unscheduled care. 'We've shown this year that progress is possible. But we need to be honest about what comes next. 'Recovery at this scale means changing how we deliver care. 'Our focus will be on protecting what matters most — that is the delivery of front line core NHS services to the highest possible standards within our available resources, but we need to be clear this requires us to modernise our provision through areas such as a greater use of technology and digital innovation.'
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Britain morphing into ‘National Health State', says think tank
Britain is turning into a 'National Health State', a think tank has said after the Chancellor gave the NHS a major funding boost in her spending review. The health service was the big winner of Wednesday's spending review, receiving an extra £29 billion per year for day-to-day spending and more cash for capital investment. Overnight, the Resolution Foundation said Rachel Reeves's announcements had followed a recent trend that saw increases for the NHS come at the expense of other public services. Ruth Curtice, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: 'Health accounted for 90% of the extra public service spending, continuing a trend that is seeing the British state morph into a National Health State, with half of public service spending set to be on health by the end of the decade.' Defence was another of Wednesday's winners, Ms Curtice said, receiving a significant increase in capital spending while other departments saw an overall £3.6 billion real-terms cut in investment. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) made similar arguments about 'substantial' investment in the NHS and defence coming at the expense of other departments, although the think tank's director Paul Johnson warned the money may not be enough. He said: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18-week target for hospital waiting times within this Parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up. 'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' Ms Curtice added that low and middle-income families had also done well out of the spending review 'after two rounds of painful tax rises and welfare cuts', with the poorest fifth of families benefiting from an average of £1,700 in extra spending on schools, hospitals and the police. She warned that, without economic growth, another round of tax rises was likely to come in the autumn as the Chancellor seeks to balance the books. She said: 'The extra money in this spending review has already been accounted for in the last forecast. 'But a weaker economic outlook and the unfunded changes to winter fuel payments mean the Chancellor will likely need to look again at tax rises in the autumn.' Speaking after delivering her spending review, Ms Reeves insisted she would not have to raise taxes to cover her spending review. She told GB News: 'Every penny of this is funded through the tax increases and the changes to the fiscal rules that we set out last autumn.'
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
The NHS will receive £6bn in funding. Here's how it will be used
Rachel Reeves has pledged a £6bn investment to accelerate NHS tests and treatments, following substantial budget increases. The funding aims to provide new scanners, ambulances, and urgent treatment centres, delivering up to four million more tests and procedures in five years. This investment supports the government's goal of reducing NHS waiting lists in England, with Labour aiming for 92 per cent of routine operations to be carried out within 18 weeks. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the investment will generate millions more diagnostic tests, scans, and procedures, building on 3.6 million extra elective care appointments already delivered. Health leaders are sceptical, with Matthew Taylor of the NHS Confederation warning that the £29bn increase may not cover rising costs and guarantee waiting time targets, while Sarah Woolnough of the King's Fund questions how all NHS needs can be met with this settlement alone.
