Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much funding from the public purse was allocated to biomedical research into Myalgic Encephalomyelitis 2014-2015.
Answered by Caroline Dinenage
In the period in question, the major National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funding for biomedical research was through its Biomedical Research Centres and Units. These support research funded by the NIHR itself and also research funded by other public, charity and industry research funders. The level of funding for biomedical research into chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of funders.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 280,442 |
2015-16 | 295,626 |
2016-17 | 130,958 |
The NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) provides the infrastructure that allows high-quality clinical research funded by charities, research funders and life-sciences industry to be undertaken throughout the National Health Service. The level of funding for biomedical research into CFS/ME for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of the NIHR, the Medical Research Council (MRC) and medical research charities. Expenditure from the CRN coordinating centre itself is also outlined below:
Financial Year | CRN funding for research, £ | Coordinating expenditure, £ |
2014-15 | 134,769 | 17,485 |
2015-16 | 125,176 | 17,796 |
2016-17 | 82,866 | 7,821 |
The MRC spend on research directly relating to CFS/ME can be found in the following table. Research into CFS/ME is a continuing priority for the MRC.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 652,044 |
2015-16 | 287,234 |
2016-17 | 286,197 |
The NIHR and the MRC welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health, including biomedical research into CFS/ME. It is not usual practice to ring-fence funds for particular topics or conditions. Applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. On this basis, it is not possible to say how much funding is planned in the current financial year.
The NIHR recognises that CFS/ME is a debilitating condition and is speaking with the United Kingdom CFS/ME Research Collaborative and patient representatives about how best we can support a joined up approach to high quality research into this complex disorder.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much funding from the public purse was allocated to biomedical research into Myalgic Encephalomyelitis 2015-2016.
Answered by Caroline Dinenage
In the period in question, the major National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funding for biomedical research was through its Biomedical Research Centres and Units. These support research funded by the NIHR itself and also research funded by other public, charity and industry research funders. The level of funding for biomedical research into chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of funders.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 280,442 |
2015-16 | 295,626 |
2016-17 | 130,958 |
The NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) provides the infrastructure that allows high-quality clinical research funded by charities, research funders and life-sciences industry to be undertaken throughout the National Health Service. The level of funding for biomedical research into CFS/ME for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of the NIHR, the Medical Research Council (MRC) and medical research charities. Expenditure from the CRN coordinating centre itself is also outlined below:
Financial Year | CRN funding for research, £ | Coordinating expenditure, £ |
2014-15 | 134,769 | 17,485 |
2015-16 | 125,176 | 17,796 |
2016-17 | 82,866 | 7,821 |
The MRC spend on research directly relating to CFS/ME can be found in the following table. Research into CFS/ME is a continuing priority for the MRC.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 652,044 |
2015-16 | 287,234 |
2016-17 | 286,197 |
The NIHR and the MRC welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health, including biomedical research into CFS/ME. It is not usual practice to ring-fence funds for particular topics or conditions. Applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. On this basis, it is not possible to say how much funding is planned in the current financial year.
The NIHR recognises that CFS/ME is a debilitating condition and is speaking with the United Kingdom CFS/ME Research Collaborative and patient representatives about how best we can support a joined up approach to high quality research into this complex disorder.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much funding from the public purse was allocated to biomedical research into Myalgic Encephalomyelitis 2016-2017.
Answered by Caroline Dinenage
In the period in question, the major National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funding for biomedical research was through its Biomedical Research Centres and Units. These support research funded by the NIHR itself and also research funded by other public, charity and industry research funders. The level of funding for biomedical research into chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of funders.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 280,442 |
2015-16 | 295,626 |
2016-17 | 130,958 |
The NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) provides the infrastructure that allows high-quality clinical research funded by charities, research funders and life-sciences industry to be undertaken throughout the National Health Service. The level of funding for biomedical research into CFS/ME for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of the NIHR, the Medical Research Council (MRC) and medical research charities. Expenditure from the CRN coordinating centre itself is also outlined below:
Financial Year | CRN funding for research, £ | Coordinating expenditure, £ |
2014-15 | 134,769 | 17,485 |
2015-16 | 125,176 | 17,796 |
2016-17 | 82,866 | 7,821 |
The MRC spend on research directly relating to CFS/ME can be found in the following table. Research into CFS/ME is a continuing priority for the MRC.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 652,044 |
2015-16 | 287,234 |
2016-17 | 286,197 |
The NIHR and the MRC welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health, including biomedical research into CFS/ME. It is not usual practice to ring-fence funds for particular topics or conditions. Applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. On this basis, it is not possible to say how much funding is planned in the current financial year.
The NIHR recognises that CFS/ME is a debilitating condition and is speaking with the United Kingdom CFS/ME Research Collaborative and patient representatives about how best we can support a joined up approach to high quality research into this complex disorder.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much funding from the public purse he plans to allocate to biomedical research into Myalgic Encephalomyelitis in the current financial year.
Answered by Caroline Dinenage
In the period in question, the major National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funding for biomedical research was through its Biomedical Research Centres and Units. These support research funded by the NIHR itself and also research funded by other public, charity and industry research funders. The level of funding for biomedical research into chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of funders.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 280,442 |
2015-16 | 295,626 |
2016-17 | 130,958 |
The NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) provides the infrastructure that allows high-quality clinical research funded by charities, research funders and life-sciences industry to be undertaken throughout the National Health Service. The level of funding for biomedical research into CFS/ME for each financial year can be found in the table below. The funding for this research came from a combination of the NIHR, the Medical Research Council (MRC) and medical research charities. Expenditure from the CRN coordinating centre itself is also outlined below:
Financial Year | CRN funding for research, £ | Coordinating expenditure, £ |
2014-15 | 134,769 | 17,485 |
2015-16 | 125,176 | 17,796 |
2016-17 | 82,866 | 7,821 |
The MRC spend on research directly relating to CFS/ME can be found in the following table. Research into CFS/ME is a continuing priority for the MRC.
Financial Year | £ |
2014-15 | 652,044 |
2015-16 | 287,234 |
2016-17 | 286,197 |
The NIHR and the MRC welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health, including biomedical research into CFS/ME. It is not usual practice to ring-fence funds for particular topics or conditions. Applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. On this basis, it is not possible to say how much funding is planned in the current financial year.
The NIHR recognises that CFS/ME is a debilitating condition and is speaking with the United Kingdom CFS/ME Research Collaborative and patient representatives about how best we can support a joined up approach to high quality research into this complex disorder.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to reduce mortality rates for people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.
Answered by David Mowat
NHS services for pancreatic cancer have been significantly improved in recent years. This includes clearer diagnostic pathways; decision making by specialist multi-disciplinary teams; and the centralisation of pancreas surgery within specialist teams.
However, we know more needs to be done. The Independent Cancer Taskforce’s report, Achieving World-Class Outcomes a Cancer Strategy for England 2015 – 2020, notes that whilst survival to date has improved significantly for some cancers, for other cancers, including pancreatic cancer, it has remained stubbornly low.
An implementation plan, Achieving World-Class Cancer Outcomes: Taking the strategy forward, was published on 12 May 2016 and we hope to see great progress as it is delivered.
We know earlier diagnosis of cancer makes it more likely that patients will receive effective treatments so we have committed funding of up to £300 million a year by 2020 to implement recommendation 24 of the report that by 2020, everyone referred with a suspicion of cancer will receive either a definitive diagnosis or the all-clear within 28 days.
In addition, NHS England has published a service specification for pancreatic cancer which clearly defines what it expects to be in place for providers to offer evidence-based, safe and effective pancreatic cancer services. This service specification has been developed by specialised clinicians, commissioners, expert patients and public health representatives to describe core and developmental service standards.
The full service specification can be found at:
http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/a02-cncr-panc.pdf
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published updated guideline, Suspected cancer: recognition and referral, in June 2015, to ensure that it reflects latest evidence and can continue to support general practitioners (GPs) to identify patients, including children and young people and urgently refer them as appropriate. NICE noted that 5,000 more lives could be saved each year in England if GPs followed the new guideline, which encourage GPs to think of cancer sooner and lower the referral threshold.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to raise public awareness of (a) pancreatic cancer and (b) other cancers for which symptoms can be non-specific and have similarities to other benign conditions.
Answered by David Mowat
Public Health England’s (PHE) Be Clear on Cancer campaigns are designed to raise the public’s awareness of specific cancer symptoms, encourage people with those symptoms to go to the doctor and diagnose cancer at an earlier stage. An early visit to a general practice can make a cancer more treatable, and thereby improve cancer survival rates. These campaigns are delivered by PHE in partnership with the Department and NHS England. There are a number of cancers, including those where symptoms can be non-specific, which are not covered by ‘Be Clear on Cancer’ explicitly.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what funding his Department has provided for research on pancreatic cancer in each of the last three years.
Answered by Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford
The information requested is not available. Spend on research funded directly by the Department’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) is categorised by Health Research Classification System (HRCS) health categories including ‘cancer’. There are no HRCS health sub-categories, such as for pancreatic cancer or other cancer sites.
Investment in cancer research by the NIHR has risen from £101 million in 2010/11 to £135 million in 2014/15 (the latest available figure). The NIHR works closely with patients, charities and our world-leading life sciences industry to support further research into pancreatic cancer.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what research his Department has conducted on the disincentives to prescribing off-patent repurposed drugs.
Answered by George Freeman
The Department has conducted no such research. Current arrangements already allow off-patent drugs to be prescribed for new purposes where this is the most appropriate clinical treatment course for a patient. Prescribing decisions are a matter for the clinical judgement of the prescriber concerned.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the contribution of 6 November 2015 by the Minister for Community and Social Care, Official Report, column 1307, what the evidential basis is for his statement that the provisions of the Off-patent Drugs Bill would be potentially harmful.
Answered by George Freeman
The current legal framework allows a clinician to prescribe drugs outside their licensed indication where that will best meet the clinical needs of their patient. This clinical freedom is crucial in delivering appropriate healthcare to groups of patients for whom medicines have not historically been licensed, e.g. children. It is also helpful in enabling prescribers to quickly pick up and apply new evidence that will help patients with particular clinical needs. The Off-Patent Drugs Bill would introduce a legal duty to apply for a licence for off-patent drugs where evidence of effectiveness for a new indication becomes available. This will create an expectation that only licensed uses of drugs are acceptable and therefore that off-label use is not appropriate. This would cause unnecessary delays in patients getting the medicines they need by slowing the rapid uptake of new evidence in clinical practice. This is why we believe the proposed legislation could potentially be harmful.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to improve the availability of off-patent drugs for novel uses through non-legislative measures.
Answered by George Freeman
Clinicians can already prescribe off-patent drugs off-label on clinical grounds if they judge this is the right thing to do to meet the individual clinical needs of their patients.
The Government is keen to accelerate the adoption of innovative medicines and increase the innovative use of existing medicines where the evidence reports clinical benefits and cost effectiveness to patients. To that end, we are seeking a number of initiatives to provide innovation but whilst supporting the aims of the Private Member’s Bill on this subject, we do not believe the proposed mechanism is either practicable and desirable.
We are working with NHS England, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the General Medical Council and the Medicines and Health products Regulatory Agency to ensure that there is better information available to support clinicians who wish to prescribe off-patent drugs for off-label indications, and to ensure that new evidence is picked up more quickly and reliably and translated into clinical practice and can be fed through into licensing applications.
A huge amount of work is also going on in the Accelerated Access Review which will support the “pull” of innovation through to clinical practice.
As part of the debate on the Access to Medical Treatments Bill, we are working with officials in the Department, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, and the Health and Social Care Information Centre to see how the power in the Bill, if it were to pass, could address the lack of provision of information on new uses for existing medicines via the power to create a database of innovations in order to support evidence-based prescribing.