Alectinib: where the agencies disagree
This page collects every recorded health technology assessment decision for one molecule across the agencies in our archive, and compares them. The comparison is the point: each agency publishes its own verdict, none publishes how that verdict sits against the others.
What the record shows
AIFA (Italy), AOTMIT (Poland) and G-BA (Germany), among others, recommended or restricted alectinib, while AWMSG (Wales), CONITEC (Brazil) and NYE METODER (Norway) did not recommend it.
Assessment has run over 9.3 years, from 29 Mar 2017 at NICE (England) to 2026 at PBAC (Australia).
CIPM (Spain) changed its position: not recommended on 24 Apr 2025, recommended by 24 Sep 2025, after a resubmission.
Every one of the eight highest-volume agencies in this archive has a record for alectinib.
Not every gap is a refusal: for alectinib, 1 submission was never made and 1 was withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
The file is active: 14 of 37 records date from 2023 or later.
The programme is broad: 9 distinct indication wordings are recorded for alectinib by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, NICE, PBAC and SMC).
6 of these 37 records carry a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
NICE (England) was first to assess alectinib, on 29 Mar 2017; ZIN (Netherlands) did not open a file until 6 Oct 2025 — an unusually long tail of 8.6 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 6 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 8 years in total.
11 of the 15 agencies here assessed alectinib more than once, PBAC (Australia) most often at 6 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
alectinib has been through 15 of the 18 agencies in this archive — among the most widely assessed molecules on file.
The full ledger for alectinib reads 20 recommended, 6 not recommended, 6 restricted and 2 deferred to NICE, with 3 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZIN (Netherlands) | 6 Oct 2025 | Advies - vergoed alectinib (Alecensa®) voor de behandeling van niet-kleincellige longkanker (NSCLC) | reimbursed | source |
| PBAC (Australia) | 2025 | Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) | Recommended | source |
| CIPM (Spain) | 24 Apr 2025 | Indicaciones terapéuticas autorizadas: Alecensa en monoterapia está indicado como tratamiento adyuvante tras la resecció… | not financed by the SNS (financed 2025-09) | source |
| AIFA (Italy) | 31 Jul 2018 | trattamento di pazienti adulti affetti da carcinoma polmonare non a piccole cellule (NSCLC) positivo per la chinasi del … | conditionally innovative | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 8 May 2017 | As monotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer previously treated with crizotinib. | not recommended | source |
32 further decisions for alectinib, across 14 agencies, are not shown here. They include the most recent record on file, 2026 from PBAC (Australia); its outcome is in the subscriber dataset. They link to 23 further source documents.
Related molecules
- sotorasib — divergent outcome (recommended vs not recommended) on a shared indication
- ibrutinib — same ATC class L01E — Antineoplastics
- zanubrutinib — same ATC class L01E — Antineoplastics
- cabozantinib — same ATC class L01E — Antineoplastics
- selpercatinib — same ATC class L01E — Antineoplastics
- acalabrutinib — same ATC class L01E — Antineoplastics
Coverage: 37 decisions for alectinib from 15 agencies, 2017 to 2026. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L01E — Antineoplastics. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.