UK drug appraisal process is restricting access to cancer drugs, say charities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NHS patients are being denied access to innovative new cancer treatments while other similar countries find ways to make them available, a report by two charities, Breast Cancer Now and Prostate Cancer UK, has found.1 The document has called for reform of the system that assesses new drugs to allow price negotiation. The report reviewed the drug appraisal systems and the availability of breast and prostate cancer drugs in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, Australia, Canada, and Sweden. It concluded that while no system was perfect there were aspects of other health systems that could be potentially implemented in the United Kingdom to improve levels of access. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England and Wales, and the Scottish Medicines Consortium in Scotland, assess new …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.150 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.010 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".