Venetoclax: 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

AIFA (Italy), DMC (Denmark) and G-BA (Germany), among others, recommended or restricted venetoclax, while CIPM (Spain) did not recommend it.

On the same population the two systems disagree outright: NICE (England) recorded restricted in TA796, while PBAC (Australia) recorded not recommended for “Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL)”.

ZIN (Netherlands) has been easier on venetoclax than on its own caseload: it refused 0 of 5 decisive submissions here (0%), against a base rate of 26% across everything it has assessed.

Assessment has run over 9.4 years, from 24 Nov 2016 at AWMSG (Wales) to 15 Apr 2026 at ZIN (Netherlands).

AOTMIT (Poland) changed its position: not recommended on 21 Dec 2017, restricted by 26 Jul 2023, after a resubmission.

Every one of the eight highest-volume agencies in this archive has a record for venetoclax.

Not every gap is a refusal: for venetoclax, 1 submission was never made — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.

The file is active: 7 of 61 records date from 2023 or later.

The programme is broad: 17 distinct indication wordings are recorded for venetoclax by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, NICE, PBAC and SMC).

8 of these 61 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 venetoclax, on 24 Nov 2016; CIPM (Spain) did not open a file until 10 Jun 2021 — a wide spread of 4.6 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.

The record arrives in waves: 9 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 11 years in total.

Restriction is doing real work here: 16 of 48 decisive outcomes narrowed venetoclax to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at AIFA (Italy), AOTMIT (Poland) and NICE (England) among others.

13 of the 14 agencies here assessed venetoclax more than once, PBAC (Australia) most often at 8 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.

venetoclax has been through 14 of the 18 agencies in this archive — among the most widely assessed molecules on file.

The full ledger for venetoclax reads 25 recommended, 16 restricted, 7 not recommended and 5 deferred to NICE, with 8 in other categories.

Decisions on file

AgencyDateIndication as recorded OutcomeSource
NICE (England)7 Jan 2026NICE TA1119published appraisalsource
ZIN (Netherlands)14 Jul 2025Advies - vergoed venetoclax (Venclyxto®) met obinutuzumab voor bepaalde patiënten met niet eerder behandelde leukemiereimbursed (sluis)source
PBAC (Australia)2024Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL)Not Applicablesource
AOTMIT (Poland)26 Jul 2023programu lekowego „Leczenie chorych na przewlekłą białaczkę limfocytową (ICD-10: C91.1)recommended conditionallysource
PHARMAC (New Zealand)21 Feb 2019adults relapsed or refractory CLL with 17p deletionPTAC advice: No Formal Recommendation · decision reachedsource

56 further decisions for venetoclax, across 14 agencies, are not shown here. They include the most recent record on file, 15 Apr 2026 from ZIN (Netherlands); its outcome is in the subscriber dataset. They link to 45 further source documents.

Related molecules

Coverage: 61 decisions for venetoclax from 14 agencies, 2016 to 2026. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L01X — Antineoplastics. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.

Request the full decision record