No drug treatment for prostate cancer patient
From Around South Australia
ROBIN Stevens is dying of prostate cancer and he can no longer get the drug that was helping him.
If he had breast cancer, he would still be eligible for Taxotere, a chemotherapy drug.
His wife Angela says the powerful breast cancer lobby has ensured women have access to the "gold medal" treatment, but men don't have the same benefit.
His doctors have written to state and federal politicians, saying that without Taxotere, his cancer - which has spread to his bones - will "increase and overwhelm him".
His GP has written to federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon, asking her to review the case and allow further treatments.
"Unfortunately, without this treatment of Taxotere, I fear that Robin's bony metastasis will increase and overwhelm him," he writes.
Related Coverage
- Insulation fund through the roof Adelaide Now, 1 day ago
- Not enough Aussies get chemo - survey Adelaide Now, 7 days ago
- Cancer patients can't get chemo Adelaide Now, 8 days ago
- Aspirin a breast cancer lifesaver Adelaide Now, 18 Feb 2010
- A decade of medical breakthroughs Daily Telegraph, 2 Jan 2010
Mr Stevens' urologist says he has responded well to the drug and that it should be the main part of his therapy.
Mrs Stevens says he received 10 shots of Taxotere, which is all men are allowed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and then pushed to get three more. Another cycle would cost up to $30,000.
"We have . . . been advised that because the women's breast cancer lobby groups are very proactive and far more organised than men's lobby groups, they . . . have been successful in having unlimited access to the drug Taxotere," she wrote in a letter to politicians.
"I would like for my husband to have every opportunity to have an extended quality of life."
Associate Professor Bogda Koczwara, head of medical oncology at Flinders Medical Centre, said the Government had to consider cost-effectiveness with every PBS listing. "There is often that sentiment . . . that some cancers have better advocacy," she said.
The Health Department said the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee used sound, evidence-based principles to decide which products should be subsidised, or restricted.
The same requirements were used in all cases, to ensure consistency and fairness, a spokeswoman said.
