Letrozole: 4 agencies, 1998–2015
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
No agency in this archive has refused letrozole: all 8 decisive outcomes across 3 agencies were positive or positive with restrictions.
The file has been open for more than a decade: 17.6 years separate the first record, 1 May 1998 at PHARMAC (New Zealand), from the most recent, 2 Dec 2015 at HAS (France).
No assessment is on file from PBAC (Australia), TLV (Sweden), CIPM (Spain) and G-BA (Germany), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Nothing has been added since 2015; on this evidence the file is dormant.
Against its own class, letrozole is an outlier: 100% of its decisive outcomes were positive, where molecules sharing ATC class L02B average 78%.
PHARMAC (New Zealand) was first to assess letrozole, on 1 May 1998; HAS (France) did not open a file until 3 Jan 2007 — an unusually long tail of 8.7 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 6 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 3 of 8 decisive outcomes narrowed letrozole to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at PHARMAC (New Zealand) and SMC (Scotland).
3 of the 4 agencies here assessed letrozole more than once, PHARMAC (New Zealand) most often at 4 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 letrozole.
The full ledger for letrozole reads 5 recommended, 3 restricted, 1 other and 1 deferred to NICE.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HAS (France) | 2 Dec 2015 | Indication extension | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 24 May 2006 | First line treatment for new patients with early breast cancer | PTAC advice: Medium · decision reached | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 8 May 2006 | Adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive invasive early breast cancer | accepted (restricted) | source |
| AWMSG (Wales) | 26 Oct 2005 | Treatment of early invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women who have received prior standard adjuvant tamoxifen th… | excluded, NICE appraised | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 1 Nov 2003 | First line treatment of advanced breast cancer | PTAC advice: Low · decision reached | source |
5 further decisions for letrozole, across 3 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 3 further source documents.
Related molecules
- neratinib — divergent outcome (recommended vs not recommended) on a shared indication
- enzalutamide — same ATC class L02B — Endocrine therapy
- darolutamide — same ATC class L02B — Endocrine therapy
- apalutamide — same ATC class L02B — Endocrine therapy
- abiraterone — same ATC class L02B — Endocrine therapy
- fulvestrant — same ATC class L02B — Endocrine therapy
Coverage: 10 decisions for letrozole from 4 agencies, 1998 to 2015. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L02B — Endocrine therapy. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.