“I underwent chemotherapy and radiation. The goal was cure. It did not work,” she said.
Ailien Ampuero’s only remaining option, immunotherapy, costs about $150,000.
Last year, she underwent major surgery in an attempt to control the cancer.
Despite this, the cancer continued to progress.
“Today, the disease is advanced and aggressive,” Ampuero said.
“A tumour has caused a blood clot in my leg by compressing a major vein, leaving me with pain, reduced mobility and nerve damage.”
Ailien Ampuero with her son, Gaston, 12.
One option remains available to Ampuero: immunotherapy treatment, pembrolizumab (Keytruda), which could potentially extend her life.
In New Zealand, Keytruda is funded for people who meet the special authority criteria set by Pharmac.
However, even with a reduced pricing arrangement, Ampuero’s treatment is expected to cost about $150,000, down from around $340,000.
“Why does access to potentially life-extending cancer treatment in New Zealand depend so heavily on the type of cancer a person has, and whether that treatment is publicly funded?” she said.
“Treatment can be publicly funded for one type of cancer, but not for another, depending on how it is classified within funding criteria.
“When a treatment exists but is not funded, it effectively becomes accessible only to those who can raise extraordinary amounts of money.
“In my case, that means hundreds of thousands of dollars raised through public donations, while also trying to navigate life with terminal illness and raise my son.”
Ailien Ampuero was diagnosed with cervical cancer at age 28 in 2024.
Ampuero said fundraising for treatment has also had unintended financial consequences.
“Because Givealittle money is treated as a cash asset while sitting in my account for treatment, my eligibility for Temporary Additional Support through Work and Income has been cancelled,” she said.
“I am not sharing this to criticise individuals or institutions, but to highlight how complex the system becomes when illness, funding rules, and survival intersect.
“That’s something I didn’t understand before going through this.”
Pharmac’s director of advice and assessment, Dr David Hughes said Pharmac uses the same process to consider all funding applications to ensure that every application is treated fairly.
“Pharmac accepts applications from suppliers, clinicians and consumers,” Hughes said.
“Once we receive an application to fund a medicine, it is then assessed by clinical experts on our Pharmacology and Therapeutics Advisory Committee (PTAC) or one of our specialist advisory committees like the Cancer Treatments Advisory Committee.
“These committees provide Pharmac with objective specialist knowledge and expertise within specific clinical areas, such as diabetes, cancer and mental health.”
Hughes said the advisory committees recommend whether an application should be funded, deferred or declined.
“When Pharmac considers funding a medicine, we look at a range of factors, including how well it works, who is likely to benefit, the health gains it could deliver and how it compares with other medicines we are considering for funding,” he said.
“Applications that have been recommended for funding are then ranked against other unfunded medicines on Pharmac’s options for investment list.
“This is a list of treatments we would like to fund if we have the available budget.
“When funding is available, we consult with the public and seek feedback on all medicines being considered, including proposals to fund medicines and proposals to decline funding.”
He said Pharmac’s role includes considering whether to fund medicines for people in “exceptional circumstances” when those treatments are not currently available for them.
“Pharmac uses its Named Patient Pharmaceutical Assessment (NPPA) process to consider whether to fund a treatment for an individual patient who does not meet the standard funding criteria and whose clinical circumstances are exceptional.”
A Givealittle page set up to support Ampuero has raised $24,000 of the $150,000 required to fund her immunotherapy treatment.