HL Deb 19 December 2001 vol 630 cc244-6

2.52 p.m.

Baroness Masham of Ilton

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In so doing, I declare an interest having had my life saved by a blood transfusion.

The Question was as follows:

To ask her Majesty's Government whether sufficient use is being made of artificial blood substitutes and alternative treatments for anaemia in cancer patients to help combat any shortage in blood supplies.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

My Lords, the National Blood Service currently meets all NHS demands for blood. There are a number of erythropoietin, or EPO, drugs licensed to shorten the period of anaemia in patients receiving platinum-containing chemotherapy. These are available for clinicians to prescribe when it is clinically beneficial.

Baroness Masham of Ilton

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Is he aware that next year or the year after a test may be available for CJD, in which case there may be a serious shortage of blood as donors may be worried about coming forward because of the effect on life insurance and mortgages?

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

My Lords, first, we are indebted to the 1.9 people million who come forward every year to give blood. Currently blood stocks are in a healthy state. The noble Baroness is right because potentially there is the introduction of a test perhaps within the next three to five years for vCJD. The National Blood Service has carried out a scenario of testing to examine the impact of that test in reducing the number of blood donors. What was quoted in the media was the worst-case scenario when there might be a reduction of 50 per cent in the number of donors. That is very much a worse-case scenario.

The chief medical officers of the UK held a Better Blood Transfusion Conference which led to the establishment of a national transfusion committee to examine these matters. In particular, it will examine alternatives to blood supplies and whether they are feasible.

Lord Ashley of Stoke

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that his first reply sounded as though everything was fine? However, does he further agree that, because it is impossible to guarantee the adequacy of future blood supplies and because we tend to identify viruses such as CJD, AIDS and Hepatitis C too late for some people, in the interests of security and safety it is imperative that we intensify our search for non-blood products and that this is an area in which cost-cutting will be indefensible?

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that question. It is correct to say that the National Blood Service, with the help of many members of the public, has put to right previous problems in relation to the holding of adequate blood supplies. In the past three to four years a tremendous amount of work has been undertaken.

I agree with my noble friend about the urgency of investigating the appropriate use of alternatives. The National Blood Service set up an appropriate use of blood working group which is looking at ways of minimising exposure to the unknown risk of transmission of vCJD by transfusing blood only when absolutely necessary. It is also—and this is very important—ensuring the most effective and efficient use of blood as an increasingly scarce resource. That group is also examining alternatives to blood transfusion. In addition, the National Blood Service is undertaking another campaign to encourage more people to give blood in the current circumstances.

Lord Clement-Jones

My Lords, is it not the case that continental countries widely use the alternatives to blood products in cancer treatment? Is it not time that we were ahead of continental countries both in terms of patient outcomes and treatments?

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

My Lords, there are many ways in which the National Health Service can he proud of its achievements. There are many examples of innovative services and high quality teaching and research. We can be pleased with the way in which the National Blood Service responded to a very big problem in blood supplies some years ago. Of course we need to examine alternatives and we will look at the experience of countries abroad. That is why the chief medical officers of the UK held a conference; why a working group has been set up; and why the National Blood Service will be taking that work forward.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I, too, declare a non-financial interest as chairman of Cancer Research UK. Following on from the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, is my noble friend aware that there is concern among clinicians about the availability for patient care of funds earmarked for cancer treatments under the national cancer plan? Furthermore, can he assure the House that the Government will monitor rigorously and transparently those fund allocations and their use?

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

My Lords, first, I want to congratulate my noble friend on her appointment as chairman of Cancer Research UK, which brings together the Imperial Cancer Research Fund and the Cancer Research Campaign, both of which have done sterling jobs over the years.

As regards funding, I can confirm to my noble friend that cancer services remain a key priority for the Government and that the cancer plan projects that in the next financial year there will be an extra £407 million of funding for services. Of that, £76 million will be earmarked within NHS budgets. I can also confirm to her that we will performance-manage the NHS overall in order to ensure that the money is spent wisely and that cancer receives the priority it deserves.

Baroness Masham of Ilton

My Lords, does the Minister agree that erythropoietin may be of more benefit to cancer patients than blood transfusions? Would he go to the United States to see what it is doing and how it has monitored the process?

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

My Lords, I am afraid that the Chief Whip has said I am not allowed to go. The current state of knowledge of the drug, which we considered as a potential referral to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, and the guidance we have used so far indicates that there simply is not enough evidence on which to make a judgment.

A number of randomised controlled trials are being undertaken both within the US and Europe. When the results of those trials are known, and when we have more evidence concerning the effectiveness of the drug, we will again consider whether it will be worth referring the drug to NICE.