Page 1

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY APPRAISAL PROGRAMME Equality impact assessment – Guidance development

STA Selpercatinib for untreated RET fusion-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

The impact on equality has been assessed during this appraisal according to the principles of the NICE equality scheme.

Final draft guidance

(when no draft guidance was issued)

Have the potential equality issues identified during the scoping process been addressed by the committee, and, if so, how?

No equality issues were identified during the scoping process.

Have any other potential equality issues been raised in the submissions, expert statements or academic report, and, if so, how has the committee addressed these?
- A professional organisation highlighted that there is an absence of funding for pathology departments to prepare tissue for genomic testing. This means that individual trusts need to provide funding for this work. In trusts where funding is lacking, people do not have access to comprehensive testing and instead receive targeted testing which may not include RET fusion mutation screening. These people may be disadvantaged because access to targeted therapies like selpercatinib need a diagnostic confirmation first. The committee acknowledged that a technology appraisal cannot change how individual trusts receive funding to run genomic testing. Therefore, it concluded that this issue could not be addressed in a technology appraisal.

Technology appraisals: Guidance development Equality impact assessment for the single technology appraisal of selpercatinib for untreated RET fusion-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer Issue date: June 2023

1 of 3

Page 2

Have any other potential equality issues been identified by the committee, and, if so, how has the committee addressed these?

None identified. 4. Do the recommendations make it more difficult in practice for a specific group to access the technology compared with other groups? If so, what are the barriers to, or difficulties with, access for the specific group?
No. 5. Is there potential for the recommendations to have an adverse impact on people with disabilities because of something that is a consequence of the disability?
No. 6. Are there any recommendations or explanations that the committee could make to remove or alleviate barriers to, or difficulties with, access identified in questions 4 or 5, or otherwise fulfil NICE’s obligations to promote equality?
Not applicable. 7. Have the committee’s considerations of equality issues been described in the final appraisal determination, and, if so, where?
Yes, in section 3.2.

Approved by Associate Director (name): Jasdeep Hayre

Page 3

Date: 4 April 2023

3 of 3