Nilotinib: 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
SMC (Scotland) and TLV (Sweden) recommended or restricted nilotinib, while AWMSG (Wales) and PHARMAC (New Zealand) did not recommend it.
On the same population the two systems disagree outright: SMC (Scotland) recorded recommended for “For the treatment of adult patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myelogenous leukaemia (CML) in the chronic phase.”, while AWMSG (Wales) recorded not recommended for “For the treatment of paediatric patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myelogenous leuka…”.
Assessment has run over 10.2 years, from 23 Apr 2008 at TLV (Sweden) to 12 Jun 2018 at AWMSG (Wales).
SMC (Scotland) changed its position: restricted on 9 Jun 2008, recommended by 8 Aug 2011.
No assessment is on file from PBAC (Australia), CIPM (Spain) and G-BA (Germany), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for nilotinib, 1 submission was never made — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
Nothing has been added since 2018; on this evidence the file is dormant.
4 distinct indication wordings are recorded for nilotinib by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG and SMC).
TLV (Sweden) was first to assess nilotinib, on 23 Apr 2008; PHARMAC (New Zealand) did not open a file until 9 May 2013 — a wide spread of 5.1 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 4 years in total.
4 of the 5 agencies here assessed nilotinib more than once, AWMSG (Wales) most often at 3 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
Coverage is narrow: only 5 of the 18 agencies here have assessed nilotinib.
The full ledger for nilotinib reads 3 not recommended, 3 recommended, 2 deferred to NICE and 1 non-submission, with 2 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AWMSG (Wales) | 12 Jun 2018 | For the treatment of paediatric patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myelogenous leuka… | not endorsed (non-submission) | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 12 Mar 2018 | In paediatric patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myelogenous leukaemia (CML) in the chronic phase. In paediatric patients with Philade… | not recommended | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 9 May 2013 | Chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) | PTAC advice: Decline · decision reached | source |
| TLV (Sweden) | 12 Oct 2011 | Tasigna i styrkan 150 mg ingår i högkostnadsskyddet med villkor | general subsidy | source |
| HAS (France) | 6 Apr 2011 | Listing (Transparency Committee) | ASMR IV | source |
6 further decisions for nilotinib, across 4 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 6 further source documents.
Related molecules
- bosutinib — divergent outcome (not recommended vs recommended) on a shared indication
- dasatinib — divergent outcome (not recommended vs 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
Coverage: 11 decisions for nilotinib from 5 agencies, 2008 to 2018. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L01E — Antineoplastics. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.