I beg to move,
That this House has considered innovation in the field of rare retinal disease.
It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I very much look forward to the contribution of the Lib Dem spokesman, the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling). I think his contribution will be a personal one and important to the debate. I am pleased to see the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar), in his place, and I look forward to his contribution. I am also pleased to see the Minister here. I have given both the shadow Minister and the Minister my speech with my highlighted comments, as requested. I thank the hon. Members for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) and for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) for coming along.
I thank the Backbench Committee for granting the debate. I am aware that it is niche, because only 25,000 people across this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland suffer from the condition, but it affects 25,000 people and 25,000 families. As one who has tried to promote rare diseases on every occasion, I asked for this debate; the Members in the Chamber today have a particular interest.
As the wearer of glasses since the young age of eight, which was not yesterday, I am thankful that the issues with my eyes are easily diagnosed and treated. My annual appointment with Mackey’s opticians in Newtownards keeps me right. It was with their help that I realised I had type 2 diabetes. With diabetes, we have to be a wee bit more careful with eyesight issues.
I remember going to an event in Cambridge, where I got my eyes tested on one of the new machines they had. A guy came up to me and said, “Jim, when was the last time you got your eyes tested?” I said, “I get them tested every year.” He said, “Well, here’s my read-out. Take it back to your optician.” I took it back, thinking I had glaucoma. My dad had glaucoma, so I was rather worried. I was probably a wee bit perturbed because I had been to my opticians a few months before and was not aware of anything. I went to my optician and she said, “Jim, do you want to do the big tests?” We did the big tests up in Belfast. They did everything that they could possibly do with my eyes, and thank goodness I did not have it. The point I am making is that it is really important that eyes are tested regularly.
There is a well-known saying that the eyes are the window to the soul, and so they are, but they also are an indication of overall health and therefore eye care is as vital as any other part of our national health. The hon. Member for Torbay and I talked before the debate. Chris McCausland, who did “Strictly Come Dancing”, has a rare retinal disease but look at what that man can do—his sense of humour, as a comedian, and his talent. He whizzed round the floor better than someone with full eyesight. He inspired the nation and rightly won.
Although rare diseases are individually rare, they are collectively common, with one in 17 people affected by a rare disease at some point in their lives. In the UK that equates to approximately 3.5 million people and 110,000 in Northern Ireland. My interest in rare disease goes back to the Northern Ireland Assembly where I served for 12 years before coming here. This debate today will focus on a niche rare disease, and specifically on rare diseases relating to retinal diseases that lead to sight loss.
Inherited retinal dystrophies—IRDs—is the collective term used to describe inherited sight loss conditions that occur when cells in the retina deteriorate in an unpredictable way. I will talk about research and development because that is really important. IRDs are the most common cause of blindness in children and working-age people in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Although the conditions are rare, with some 25,000 people affected in the UK and 600 in Northern Ireland—some are my constituents, which is why I have introduced the debate—the impact on the people living with them is significant. When I ask people which sense they would not want to lose, they always say sight, because the eyes are the window to the world and to the soul—they help people appreciate what is around them. Although the other senses are also important, when someone loses their sight, they almost entirely lose the ability to know what is happening around them.
People living with rare retinal conditions not only face challenges in their day-to-day life caused by sight loss, but experience the added challenge of living with a rare condition and the impact it has on them and their families. That includes delays and complexity in getting a diagnosis. I know the Minister is always happy to respond positively and I look forward to her comments on how we can hurry up, or make easier, the process of getting a diagnosis.
Living with a rare condition also presents challenges in accessing treatment and specialist care. There is also a lack of awareness of these conditions. Some 95% of rare diseases currently lack an approved treatment and the existing standard of care for rare retinal diseases is equally limited, meaning there is high unmet clinical need. I will go into the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s process at the end of my speech, since it relates to my major request. Others will add their contributions as well.
The dual-pronged burden on patients with rare retinal disease means supporting access to new innovations that can improve the diagnosis, treatment, and care for these conditions. That should be a priority for the Government and their relevant agencies. Sight is the most important sense among adults in the UK, with 88% of people ranking it as their most valuable sense in a recent study published in JAMA Ophthalmology.
According to a report by Deloitte, the estimated total cost of IRDs in the UK is £523.3 million, a massive total, showing the importance of the debate. The total includes wellbeing costs of £196.1 million and total economic costs of £327.2 million, of which productivity costs affecting those of working age are £114.1 million and informal carer costs are £84.5 million. Those statistics support the necessity of the debate and highlight the importance of having a ministerial response on the Government’s stance on the issue.
New innovations that represent a step change in the standard of care for people living with rare retinal diseases are on the horizon, which we have to be prepared for. At the centre of this is a shift toward personalised medicine made possible by recent advances in cell and gene therapies, a transformative class of medicines described by the Minister of State for Science, Research and Innovation, Lord Vallance, as a “new era of cures”. I hope this is where we are going. CGTs are highly specialised types of treatment that aim to treat the root cause of diseases and disorders by augmenting, repairing, replacing, or regenerating organs, tissues, cells, genes, and metabolic processes in the body. Often one-off treatments, they can deliver potential benefits over the course of a patient’s lifetime and therefore represent a step change in how we treat disease. The families, as well as the people who have the retinal disease, are in the middle of that process and experience all the angst that comes with it as well.
Access to new innovations and treatments for rare diseases, termed “orphan medicines”, is a challenge across all healthcare systems. Smaller patient populations along with complex and difficult diagnoses can mean the cost of developing new treatments is higher, compared with treatments for more common diseases, and there can be more uncertainty in the evidence base generated from clinical trials.
In a study on social attitudes to rare diseases, 82% of participants felt that NICE should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatments for rare diseases differently from more common diseases, taking into account the additional challenges in developing medicines for rare diseases and, of course, looking at rare diseases overall. It is therefore vital that the regulatory or assessment bodies factor in those considerations when making decisions on whether to approve new treatments or new innovations for rare retinal diseases.
I will now try to develop an argument on one of my other asks. In England, the assessment body for medicine, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, has two medicine appraisal pathways: the standard technology appraisal pathway and the highly specialised technology pathway. That is, perhaps, the central core issue of the debate. In Northern Ireland, the Department of Health considers and endorses technology appraisals undertaken by NICE, but, whatever the NICE approvals are here, the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Health Department follow its indications and directive—whatever happens here comes to us. We will be the beneficiaries of NICE recommendations in Northern Ireland, so the debate is really important for me both as the DUP’s health spokesperson and as a Member representing a constituency in Northern Ireland, where health is a devolved matter.
Treatments for very rare diseases have traditionally struggled to get approval from NICE when routed through this standard technology appraisal pathway, which is not designed to factor in the additional uncertainty associated with rare disease treatments; we have a big ask in relation to that, Minister. It is therefore vital that the higher specialised technology appraisal pathway can enable timely patient access to treatments for rare diseases.
NICE is conducting a review of its HST programme criteria for determining what treatments are assessed by the HST pathway. The aims of the review, which are welcome, are to ensure more consistent, predictable and transparent decisions, but there are definitely concerns that the refinements proposed by NICE in its consultation may in fact narrow the number of future treatments eligible for the HST pathway, and, ultimately, risk patient access to future treatments for rare retinal disease. I will have three or four asks at the end, but that will be one of the key ones and it will conflict with the ambitions set out in priority 4 of the Government’s rare diseases action plan 2024 for improved
“access to specialist care, treatment and drugs”.
Of particular concern for retinal disease today are the thresholds being proposed under criteria 1 and 3. Criterion 1 is that the disease is ultra-rare and debilitating, which is defined as having a prevalence above 1 in 50,000 in England. Criterion 2 is that
“no more than 300 people in England are eligible for the technology in its licensed indication”,
and that the technology is not an individualised medicine. Those changes, which tighten the criteria for HST routing, would force more new and innovative treatments for rare retinal disease, as well as other rare diseases, to be assessed via the STA pathway.
To be approved via the STA pathway, treatments are required to meet a significantly lower incremental cost-effectiveness ratio threshold, which is often not possible for many treatments for rare diseases. As a result, innovations might not be approved by NICE for routine use in the NHS, and that is the question I am posing to the Minister.
I am very pleased to see the Minister in her place; she usually has to answer my queries in debates and she always tries to do so. People living with retinal disease, as well as carers and clinicians, all highlight slowing down the progression or, if possible, reversing sight loss as a top priority for future treatments for IRDs. Delays in access to treatment may result in further disease progression and the deterioration of sight. We need solutions to improve diagnosis, treatment and care for people living with rare retinal diseases. To address the concerns on the proposed refinements to the NICE HST criteria, I would like to ask what discussions the Department of Health and Social Care and Ministers have had with NICE on the potential impact of the changes on people living with rare retinal diseases, and on opportunities for appropriate flexibility? Will Ministers, in the absence of any meaningful change to the HST criteria, commit to exploring a potential “third way”—it is always good to have a third way—for technologies that do not meet the criteria for HST and have a low likelihood of positive recommendations under the STA pathway?
On the support for people living with rare retinal diseases more broadly, the Government’s UK rare diseases framework and the corresponding annual action plans have been important in providing co-ordinated action across four areas: helping patients to get a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals—perhaps those who are not skilled or do not have the necessary training; making the co-ordination of care better; and improving access to specialist care, treatment and drugs. There are four asks in relation to that.
The momentum of the framework and the action plans must continue to deliver improvements for people living with rare diseases, including rare retinal diseases, which this debate is all about. The current framework is due to come to an end in 2026; what happens afterwards? We hope there will be a clear action plan. I am pleased that the Government have taken the decision to spend £26 billion on the NHS—it shows their commitment to addressing a key issue, which is right, and we all welcome that commitment—but do they plan to publish a new rare diseases framework in 2026? Will they include access to rare disease medicines as a central pillar of the next framework, and keep the issues relating to NICE appraisal of rare disease treatments under ongoing review so that those suffering with the conditions can access effective treatments?
Retina UK, which is celebrating its 50th anniversary, has provided some background to the current situation. I put on the record my thanks to the charity for making that information available; it probably helped all of us who are taking part in the debate. Some 54% of respondents to Retina UK’s 2022 sight loss survey were aware of research into their condition, while 20% had participated in that research and 31% could name the gene causing their condition, which was a significant improvement from 15% in 2019. That is a positive step in the right direction, reflecting better genetic diagnosis and education. However, unmet demand for genetic testing and counselling persists, emphasising the need for increased funding and accessibility.
Something that struck me about rare retinal diseases is that 93% of respondents to the survey reported experiencing anxiety, stress or loss of confidence due to sight loss, but only 16% had accessed mental health support. Some level of anxiety, depression, angst or stress often comes with a very difficult disease, particularly retinal disease. Although resources such as Discover Wellbeing offer tailored psychological support and strategies to improve resilience and quality of life, it is clear that more support needs to be offered. For example, perhaps GP surgeries could be given more information to signpost our constituents—their clients—to greater support, which should be available as they navigate their life journey in a completely different way.
It must be noted that 56% of survey respondents prioritised funding research into treatments, compared with 23% who prioritised providing support services and 21% who prioritised raising societal awareness. Improved genetic testing services and counselling are crucial to enhancing patient care and enabling clinical trial participation. Some 39% of respondents had experienced sight loss-related accidents requiring medical attention, so policies to promote access to mobility aids and rehabilitation services are also urgently needed. [Interruption.] A bell is telling me that my time is coming to an end. I am thankful for that reminder—I am on the last page of my speech.
Continued investment in research, infrastructure and inclusive technology will drive significant improvements in the lives of individuals with IRDs, but that requires commitment from the Minister, the Government and this House to increase funding for research. First, we must support funding initiatives for genetic testing, clinical trials and treatment innovation for rare retinal diseases; secondly, we must promote accessibility and enhance the programmes that provide assistive technologies, mobility aids and accessible information to individuals with sight loss; thirdly, we must expand mental health services; and fourthly, we must advocate for early diagnosis and counselling.
I have made a number of requests, but they are positive requests. I hope that, in the response from the Minister and from my Government, we can find a way forward to help those with retinal diseases. We must seek to deliver in a more effective way, and this debate is the first step towards that.