The Innovative Medicines Fund is now available to fast-track non-cancer medicines recommended with managed access

Jun 7, 2022

Written by Pip White, Principal Medical Writer

The IMF

The Innovative Medicines Fund (IMF) launched this month (June 2022) to support faster access to non-cancer drugs. This process involves National Health Service (NHS) England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) working in partnership with pharmaceutical companies to respond to the long-standing challenge of evaluating medicines and addressing the uncertainty around their effectiveness.

The IMF complements the existing Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF), which has provided funding for promising cancer medicines via managed access agreements since 2016. The IMF provides a further £340 million of NHS funding annually to expand fast access to innovative non-cancer medicines, including rare conditions.

This ringfenced money is a ‘managed access fund’, which means that all eligible patients have immediate time-limited access whilst further evidence is collected to address clinical uncertainty. To be eligible for this interim funding, the technology must have the potential to be cost effective and for new evidence to be collected within a reasonable timeframe (≤5 years). For any medicine NICE recommends with managed access, a managed access agreement (MAA) is put in place between NHS England and the company; this comprises:

  • A time-limited data collection agreement (DCA)
  • A patient access scheme (PAS) and/or a commercial access agreement (CAA).
Entry into the IMF

For companies interested in managed access via the IMF, health technology assessment (HTA) evaluations follow the standard process described in the NICE health technology evaluations manual (2022). Companies must engage early with NICE and demonstrate that their technology has the potential to address a high unmet need, provide significant clinical benefits, represent a step-change in medicine for patients and clinicians, and demonstrate that the new evidence to be generated could sufficiently reduce uncertainty.

Resolving uncertainty through the IMF

For medicines that enter the IMF, data collection requirements will depend on the uncertainties identified and NICE ensures that each DCA takes account of the considerations from multiple stakeholder perspectives (e.g. clinicians, patient groups, academics). During the data collection period, companies are responsible for:

  • Paying the costs of data collection, validation, and analysis
  • Commissioning the development of a data/statistical analysis plan
  • Engaging fully with the NICE guidance update at the end of the data collection period
  • Covering the continuing treatment costs for any patients benefitting from the medicine who were prescribed the medicine when it was in the IMF if NICE finds that the case has not been made to recommend routine use in the NHS at the point of NICE guidance update.
Resubmitting evidence and exiting the IMF

All medicines recommended with managed access in the IMF will be subject to a NICE guidance update at the end of the data collection period. The NICE guidance update will look at all the available evidence afresh: it will not necessarily follow the scope of the original evaluation. The company must therefore provide a further evidence submission that takes account of changes in relevant comparators, clinical pathways, new evidence and commercial options following the period of managed access. Following consideration of evidence submitted during the original evaluation, new evidence from the data collection period, and a new price proposal from the company, NICE will make a final recommendation for routine use in the NHS or not.

If you would like to learn more about HTA submissions (including systematic reviews, health economic modelling, and medical writing), please contact us at Source Health Economics, an independent consultancy specialising in evidence generation, health economics, and communication.


More Insights

Navigating the complexities of economic evaluation for health technology assessment in dermatology

Navigating the complexities of economic evaluation for health technology assessment in dermatology

Written by Benjamin Clark   As the body’s largest organ, the skin is affected by a vast number of diseases, with over 3,000 distinct dermatological conditions impacting more than 1.8 billion individuals globally at any time (1). With ... Read more

NICE refines the HST routing criteria: What you need to know

NICE refines the HST routing criteria: What you need to know

Written by Brian O'Toole   The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Highly Specialised Technologies (HST) programme is designed to evaluate innovative treatments for rare and complex conditions. On 19th March ... Read more

Systematic review case study: scoping research to identify comparators

Systematic review case study: scoping research to identify comparators

Written by Sneha Bhadti and David Pritchett   Establishing a list of relevant comparators at the protocol development stage is a vital step in the systematic literature review (SLR) process. Scoping research during this stage can help ... Read more

National Numeracy Day 2025: Why money and maths matter in health economics

National Numeracy Day 2025: Why money and maths matter in health economics

Written by Abby Paine and Dom Partridge This is our third year celebrating National Numeracy Day, and this year’s theme of money is especially relevant for those of us working in health economics and market access. In previous years, ... Read more