Daptomycin: 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
HAS (France), HIRA (South Korea) and SMC (Scotland) recommended or restricted daptomycin, while AWMSG (Wales) did not recommend it.
On the same population the two systems disagree outright: SMC (Scotland) recorded restricted for “Complicated skin and soft tissue infections in adults”, while AWMSG (Wales) recorded not recommended for “Treatment of paediatric (1 to 17 years of age) patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections”.
The file has been open for more than a decade: 14.9 years separate the first record, 10 Apr 2006 at SMC (Scotland), from the most recent, 5 Mar 2021 at HIRA (South Korea).
Coverage is thin among the largest agencies: 5 of the eight highest-volume bodies — PBAC (Australia), PHARMAC (New Zealand) and TLV (Sweden) among them — hold no record for daptomycin at all.
Not every gap is a refusal: for daptomycin, 2 submissions were never made — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
Nothing has been added since 2021; on this evidence the file is dormant.
5 distinct indication wordings are recorded for daptomycin by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG and SMC).
SMC (Scotland) was first to assess daptomycin, on 10 Apr 2006; HIRA (South Korea) did not open a file until 5 Mar 2021 — an unusually long tail of 14.9 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 5 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 7 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 3 of 11 decisive outcomes narrowed daptomycin to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at HIRA (South Korea) and SMC (Scotland).
3 of the 4 agencies here assessed daptomycin more than once, HAS (France) most often at 6 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
Coverage is narrow: only 4 of the 18 agencies here have assessed daptomycin.
The full ledger for daptomycin reads 6 recommended, 3 restricted, 2 not recommended and 2 non-submission.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIRA (South Korea) | 5 Mar 2021 | 1. 성인의 그람양성균에 의한 복합성 피부 및 피부 연조직 감염 2. 성인의 Methicillin 감수성 균주 및 내성 균주에 의한 right-side 심내막염을 포함하는 Staphylococcus aureus 균혈… | reimbursable only at the evaluated price | source |
| HAS (France) | 12 Jun 2019 | Listing (Transparency Committee) | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| AWMSG (Wales) | 20 Apr 2018 | Treatment of paediatric (1 to 17 years of age) patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia associated with cSSTI. | not endorsed (non-submission) | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 12 Feb 2018 | Treatment of paediatric (1 to 17 years of age) patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia associated with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections. | not recommended | source |
| HAS (France) | 10 Jan 2018 | Listing (Transparency Committee) | SMR moderate · ASMR V | source |
8 further decisions for daptomycin, across 3 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 7 further source documents.
Related molecules
- colistimethate — same ATC class J01X — Antibacterials
- fosfomycin — same ATC class J01X — Antibacterials
- dalbavancin — same ATC class J01X — Antibacterials
- tedizolid — same ATC class J01X — Antibacterials
- alirocumab — also decided by HIRA in 2021Q1
- ravulizumab — also decided by HIRA in 2021Q1
Coverage: 13 decisions for daptomycin from 4 agencies, 2006 to 2021. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class J01X — Antibacterials. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.