Paclitaxel: 6 agencies, 2004–2021
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 paclitaxel: all 21 decisive outcomes across 5 agencies were positive or positive with restrictions.
The file has been open for more than a decade: 16.7 years separate the first record, 1 Nov 2004 at PHARMAC (New Zealand), from the most recent, 2021 at PBAC (Australia).
PHARMAC (New Zealand) changed its position: restricted on 1 Nov 2004, recommended by 10 May 2007.
No assessment is on file from TLV (Sweden), CIPM (Spain) and G-BA (Germany), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for paclitaxel, 1 submission was never made and 1 was withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
Nothing has been added since 2021; on this evidence the file is dormant.
4 distinct indication wordings are recorded for paclitaxel by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, PBAC and SMC).
2 of these 24 records carry a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
PHARMAC (New Zealand) was first to assess paclitaxel, on 1 Nov 2004; HIRA (South Korea) did not open a file until 8 Nov 2019 — an unusually long tail of 15 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 8 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 10 years in total.
5 of the 6 agencies here assessed paclitaxel more than once, HAS (France) most often at 15 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
6 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for paclitaxel.
The full ledger for paclitaxel reads 17 recommended, 4 restricted, 1 withdrawn and 1 not assessed, with 1 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PBAC (Australia) | 2021 | Adenocarcinoma of the pancreas and breast cancer | Recommendation was rescinded by the PBAC, noting that there was an alternative vial size a… | source |
| HAS (France) | 13 May 2020 | Change to listing conditions (Transparency Committee) | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| HIRA (South Korea) | 6 Mar 2020 | 진행성 및 전이성 또는 국소 재발성 위암 | reimbursable only at the evaluated price | source |
| AWMSG (Wales) | 1 Aug 2019 | In combination with carboplatin for the first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in adult patients who are not… | outside AWMSG criteria | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 11 May 2009 | Metastatic breast cancer | not recommended | source |
19 further decisions for paclitaxel, across 5 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 12 further source documents.
Related molecules
- docetaxel — same ATC class L01C — Antineoplastics
- irinotecan — same ATC class L01C — Antineoplastics
- topotecan — same ATC class L01C — Antineoplastics
- trabectedin — same ATC class L01C — Antineoplastics
- cabazitaxel — same ATC class L01C — Antineoplastics
- vinorelbine — same ATC class L01C — Antineoplastics
Coverage: 24 decisions for paclitaxel from 6 agencies, 2004 to 2021. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L01C — Antineoplastics. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.