Ixazomib: 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
G-BA (Germany), HAS (France) and HIRA (South Korea), among others, recommended or restricted ixazomib, while CIPM (Spain), NYE METODER (Norway) and PBAC (Australia) did not recommend it.
Assessment has run over 6.3 years, from 7 Oct 2016 at AWMSG (Wales) to 22 Feb 2023 at NICE (England).
No assessment is on file from PHARMAC (New Zealand), which is among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for ixazomib, 1 submission was never made — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
4 distinct indication wordings are recorded for ixazomib by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, NICE, PBAC and SMC).
2 of these 14 records carry a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
AWMSG (Wales) was first to assess ixazomib, on 7 Oct 2016; NICE (England) did not open a file until 22 Feb 2023 — a wide spread of 6.3 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 4 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 7 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 3 of 12 decisive outcomes narrowed ixazomib to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at G-BA (Germany), NICE (England) and TLV (Sweden).
2 of the 10 agencies here assessed ixazomib more than once, HAS (France) most often at 4 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
10 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for ixazomib.
The full ledger for ixazomib reads 5 recommended, 4 not recommended, 3 restricted and 1 non-submission, with 1 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NICE (England) | 22 Feb 2023 | NICE TA870 | recommended (optimised) | source |
| PBAC (Australia) | 2022 | Multiple myeloma | Not Recommended | source |
| G-BA (Germany) | 21 Apr 2022 | Ninlaro — benefit assessment §35a | added benefit: non-quantifiable | source |
| HAS (France) | 30 Mar 2022 | Re-assessment of SMR and ASMR | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| NYE METODER (Norway) | 13 Feb 2022 | Kombinasjonsbehandling med deksametason og lenalidomid for behandling av refraktær og residiverende myelomatose. | not introduced | source |
9 further decisions for ixazomib, across 7 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 5 further source documents.
Related molecules
- atezolizumab — same ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics
- olaparib — same ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics
- durvalumab — same ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics
- aflibercept — same ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics
- osimertinib — same ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics
- venetoclax — same ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics
Coverage: 14 decisions for ixazomib from 10 agencies, 2016 to 2023. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.