OBJECTIVES: To examine the similarities and differences in the HTAs conducted in 6 countries in the last 5.5 years in the areas of cardiology and oncology, the therapeutic areas of greatest mortality. METHODS: We reviewed and abstracted information from 768 cardiology and 960 oncology HTAs conducted from January 1, 2007 to June 23, 2012.  Our primary focus was those made by the following public organizations: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health, Haute Autorite de Sante, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care, National Institute for Clinical Excellence, Pharmaceutical  Benefits Advisory Committee, Medical Services Advisory Committee, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.  For comparative purposes and overall interest, we also studied the HTAs of the following private American organizations: BlueCross BlueShield Technology Evaluation Center, California Technology Assessment Forum, Drug Effectiveness Review Program, Healthcore/Wellpoint, Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, and the MedCo Research Institute, and the multinational Cochrane Collaboration.  Finally, we looked at the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act generated CER grants recently made by the federal government to the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services to determine any new directions in the US.  Cardiology HTAs were divided into 12 sub-therapeutic categories; oncology 18 for ease of analysis.  Variables analyzed included specific subject of HTA and analytic methods, date of release, and results. RESULTS: Market entry of drugs and selected devices tended to affect HTA content and timing; country processes for review also affect  these variables and results.  HTAs of other single interventions and multiple modality comparisons were more variable as to timing, content, and results. CONCLUSIONS: Both the commonalities and differences found in the HTAs lend themselves to the examination of potential "economies" of evidence assessment and bases for optimal patient care.  The authors provide suggestions for policy makers.