The NHS has won a landmark High Court battle with two multinational drug companies - which could lead to savings of hundreds of millions of pounds a year in the North-East.

A judge in London rejected an action brought by Bayer and Novartis against 12 NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in the region relating to a drug to treat the biggest cause of age-related vision loss in the UK, known as wet age-related macular degeneration (wet AMD) .

The condition currently affects tens of thousands of people in the UK and is currently treated using either Lucentis, sold by Novartis, or Eylea, sold by Bayer.

The pharmaceutical giants tried to stop 12 CCGs in the North of England from offering the choice of an ‘undeniably effective and less expensive’ alternative treatment.

The 12 CCGs were Darlington; Durham Dales, Easington and Sedgefield; Hambleton, Richmondshire and Whitby; Hartlepool and Stockton; Newcastle Gateshead; North Cumbria; Durham; Northumberland; North Tyneside; South Tees; South Tyneside and Sunderland.

The decision means that patients across the country can also be offered Avastin as an alternative - a drug around 30 times cheaper than the most expensive alternative.

The decision has been welcomed by health leaders and clinicians alike, with potential national savings of hundreds of millions of pounds which bosses say can be redirected into vital resources and treatments, including medical equipment and life-saving operations across the country.

Dr David Hambleton, CCG chief officer in South Tyneside, former consultant geriatrician and lead on behalf of the North East and North Cumbria CCG Forum, said: “We are absolutely delighted that we are now in a position to offer Avastin as an alternative treatment for wet AMD to our patients across the North East and North Cumbria.

“The drug is undeniably, equally effective, and much less expensive, and the money this will save – in excess of £13.5 million per year for the 12 CCGs involved in this litigation alone, and hundreds of millions of pounds across the country – can be ploughed straight back into delivering the very best care possible to our patients.

“Here in the North, that’s enough to pay for an extra 270 nurses or 266 heart transplants every year, and in a financially stretched NHS that could be life-changing for thousands of our patients.

“It’s a victory for common sense over commercial interests.”

Novartis said it was "deeply disappointed" by the decision, and "remains of the opinion that the policy undermines the well-established legal and regulatory framework that is there to protect both patients' safety and to ensure health care professionals can prescribe with confidence".

In a statement it said: "This is a bad day for patients, doctors and the NHS. This ruling threatens to jeopardise a world-leading system that has protected patients for many years by ensuring medicines have been tested rigorously and carefully scrutinised for delivering value."

The company said it would be "exploring all options available, including appealing the decision.

A spokesperson for Bayer said: The ruling prioritises the cost of medication over doctors’ clinical judgement and expertise, as well as over the regulatory assessment of a medicine’s quality, efficacy and safety.

"However, the cost implications of treating patients with wet AMD and preserving their sight extend far beyond the price of the medication."