Patient says low-dose

Full amount would cost just £3 more per session

TAYSIDE doctors are still prescribing lower chemo doses to breast cancer patients despite agreeing to fol low n at ion a l guidelines, it has been claimed.

Oncologists were rapped by watchdogs earlier this year for cutting patients’ dosages without their knowledge.

An investigation by a government watchdog found local medics had clashed with counterparts from across the north of Scotland over the strength of docetaxel.

The drug is used to reduce the risk of breast cancer reoccurring, but can cause side-effects such as diminished blood counts.

Tayside docs chose to administer the drug at a 75mg/m2 dose, against recommended practice, believing it to be as effective as a full 100mg/m2 dose without unpleasant side effects.

However, they sought to cover this up in published care guidelines – and didn’t tell patients they were getting a weaker dose.

Figures obtained by the Tele show a 75mg/m2 dosage of docetaxel cost £20.76 per dose.

Administering the full-strength 100mg/m2 dose, in line with best practice across the north of Scotland, would have cost just £3 more – £23.76 each time.

Lee Dennis founded the NHS Tayside Cancer Care Support Group after discovering she was one of 200 patients affected by the decision.

She said: “Is that the price of a life? £3 is the price of getting rid of cancer, potentially permanently or not permanently. Are they for real?”

After Healthcare Improvement Scotland (HIS) published its report into Tayside in April, the health board vowed to give all patients full-strength doses.

However, letters seen by the Tele suggest oncologists are still pushing weakened regimes – against patients’ wishes.

This is despite medical director Professor Peter Stonebridge’s pledge that patients would get “the same regimes as in the rest of Scotland”.

One woman in her 70s sought a second opinion after consultations at Perth and Ninewells.

The patient said she wanted to try the full-strength regime to give herself the best chance of long-term survival.

However, she claims it was “dictated” to her she would only get the lower dose because of her age.

She only learned details of her situation after requesting copies of the letters sent by a cancer consultant to her GP.

The letter reads: “Given her age, her doses will be capped at 80mg/m2.

“This is important given the recent publication by HIS . . . on the basis of which we have been mandated to offer patients these drugs at 100mg/m2.