Women 'at risk' from shortfall in cancer care

Women's lives are being put at risk by one in three health authorities, because they cannot pay for proper cancer care.

Women's lives are being put at risk by one in three health authorities, because they cannot pay for proper cancer care.

It means many have not adopted recommendations by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (Nice), according to the first national audit of cancer treatment since the guidelines were published this year.

The audit shows Redbridge and Waltham Forest authority is having most problems meeting the needs of its cancer patients and has to divert funds from other treatments. The report centres on docetaxel and paclitaxel, powerful new drugs known as taxanes, used to treat ovarian and breast cancer.

Last night the Department of Health denied there were problems obtaining the drugs and said the audit did not give a truthful picture of what was happening. Mike Richards, National Cancer Director, said: "We have contacted all the NHS trusts and health authorities and they told us... they are not having any problems."

But the audit findings, to be presented by Ian Gibson MP, chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on cancer, to the Britain Against Cancer in the 21st Century Conference in London today, give a different picture.

The audit, of three-quarters of Britain's health authorities and health boards, shows one in three has not adequately funded taxanes for treating advanced breast cancer, and one in six has not been able to provide the recommended treatment for ovarian cancer. Around one in nine authorities has reduced budgets or treatments for other tumour types so that taxanes can be funded.

The audit, done by the Campaign for Effective and Rational Treatment (Cert) for the all-party group, questioned lead clinicians in all 143 NHS oncology centres, units and specialist facilities in Britain.

There are wide variations in chemotherapy for lung and colorectal cancer. Drugs for both cancers will be reviewed next year by Nice. Average waiting times for scan diagnosis and radiotherapy appear to be worse than for chemotherapy, with 22 per cent waiting four weeks or more for scans and 72 per cent waiting four weeks or more for radiotherapy.

Yesterday Dr Gibson said he could not understand why most authorities had ensured adequate funding while others failed miserably. "We learn that it could be the start of their next financial year before some health authorities get their act together even though they were told to make it an urgent priority. This is simply indefensible.

"There was a substantial increase in funding to the NHS in the March budget. The Government ... indicated to health authorities that they should use this money to pay for, amongst other things, Nice's recommendations and sufficient resources have been allocated for this. There is no excuse for this dilatory response."

David Turner, director of Cert and co-ordinator of the audit, said postcode prescribing still happened. "Whatever this new money has been used for, it certainly has not been channelled through to front-line cancer services in some areas."

The Nice guidance does not affect Northern Ireland nor Scotland, which has its own technology assessment group but has yet to issue guidance. But the findings show the situation in Scotland is worse in terms of the proportion of health boards where funding of taxanes is a problem.

Catriona Moore, policy officer for CancerBACUP, a national group campaigning to end postcode prescribing, said money needed to be ring-fenced to finance new treatments recommended by Nice.