Treatments for cancer and multiple sclerosis accepted for use on NHS

Medicines to treat patients with multiple sclerosis and a rare type of cancer have been approved for use by the NHS in Scotland.

The Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) has accepted Selpercatinib, also known as Retsevmo, for treating patients aged 12 and older, with a rare type of medullary thyroid cancer that is advanced and caused by mutations in a gene called RET.

The SMC has also has accepted Cladribine, also known as Mavenclad, for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in adults who have signs of active disease either through clinical signs or evidence of inflammation on scans.

And Ruxolitinib, also known as Jakavi, has been accepted to treat patients, aged 12 and over, with acute graft versus host disease where corticosteroids have not been effective.

Acute graft versus host disease happens when donor cells attack the body shortly after a transplant.

However Durvalumab, also known as Imfinzi, was not recommended when used together with tremelimumab as a first-line treatment for adults with hepatocellular carcinoma, the most common type of liver cancer when it is advanced or cannot be removed by surgery.

SMC chair Dr Scott Muir said: “The committee is pleased to be able to accept these new medicines for use by NHSScotland.

“Cladribine as a short course of oral tablets may be a more manageable treatment option for patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

“Selpercatinib offers an oral targeted treatment for a small group of patients with advanced medullary thyroid cancer, driven by a gene mutation.

“Ruxolitinib offers an oral treatment for graft versus host disease, a serious complication after a stem cell transplant. It is the only licensed treatment for use where corticosteroids have not been successful in controlling the disease.

“The committee was unable to accept durvalumab, used together with tremelimumab, for the treatment of adults with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

“The company’s evidence around the cost effectiveness of the treatment compared to currently available options was not sufficient.

“We would welcome a resubmission from the company addressing the issues we have raised.”