title: Did It Matter That the Cancer Drugs Fund Was Not NICE? A Retrospective Review.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) will have spent more than £1 billion between October 2010 and the introduction of reforms to its structure and operations in July 2016. There has been much more debate about the existence of the fund than about how it spent its substantial budget. It is important to undertake a retrospective examination of "where the money went" in light of the substantial reforms that will be introduced in 2016.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  We review the means by which the CDF made recent funding decisions for cancer drugs to provide an assessment of the merits of the CDF "model" as a basis for allocation decisions. We assess the extent to which proposed reforms could overcome defects in the original CDF model of prioritization, and lessons for other countries.
  
  
  METHODS
  We provide a narrative commentary on CDF's methods and processes since 2014. We evaluate methods against best practice in cost-effectiveness analysis, and processes against the "accountability for reasonableness" framework. We comment on reforms to the fund.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There are no grounds for concluding that the opportunity costs imposed on cancer patients were well evidenced, or the product of legitimate deliberative processes. We note that some of these issues will be addressed in the next incarnation of the fund, but the rationale for the fund's existence remains unconvincing.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  It is important and timely to debate how cancer drugs appraisal ought to be conducted to confront the consequences of CDF's model of appraisal. We conclude that it did matter that the CDF was not NICE.
authors.affiliation: School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Electronic address: padraig.dixon@bristol.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Padraig
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Dixon
authors.affiliation: School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
authors.forename: Charlotte
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Chamberlain
authors.affiliation: School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
authors.forename: William
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Hollingworth
mesh_terms: D026683:Advisory Committees; D000970:Antineoplastic Agents / Q000191:economics*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013222:State Medicine; D006113:United Kingdom
chemical_list: D000970:Antineoplastic Agents
keywords: Cancer Drugs Fund; cost-effectiveness; priority setting