Dulaglutide: 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
AWMSG (Wales), G-BA (Germany) and PBAC (Australia), among others, recommended or restricted dulaglutide, while CIPM (Spain) did not recommend it.
Where dulaglutide met resistance it was usually narrowed rather than refused: 5 of 14 decisive outcomes were recommendations with restrictions, against 3 outright refusals.
Assessment has run over 9.7 years, from 12 Mar 2015 at ZIN (Netherlands) to 8 Nov 2024 at AOTMIT (Poland).
HAS (France) changed its position: recommended on 29 Apr 2015, not recommended by 21 Jul 2021.
No assessment is on file from PHARMAC (New Zealand), which is among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for dulaglutide, 1 was withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
The file is active: 4 of 18 records date from 2023 or later.
3 distinct indication wordings are recorded for dulaglutide by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, PBAC and SMC).
6 of these 18 records carry a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
ZIN (Netherlands) was first to assess dulaglutide, on 12 Mar 2015; CIPM (Spain) did not open a file until 15 Jun 2023 — an unusually long tail of 8.2 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 7 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 9 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 5 of 14 decisive outcomes narrowed dulaglutide to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at AOTMIT (Poland), AWMSG (Wales) and SMC (Scotland) among others.
4 of the 9 agencies here assessed dulaglutide more than once, PBAC (Australia) most often at 6 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
9 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for dulaglutide.
The full ledger for dulaglutide reads 6 recommended, 5 restricted, 3 not recommended and 2 deferred, with 2 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AOTMIT (Poland) | 8 Nov 2024 | Trulicity reimbursement recommendation | not recommended | source |
| PBAC (Australia) | 2024 | Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) | The PBAC rescinded the May 2022 recommendation for dulaglutide. | source |
| G-BA (Germany) | 21 Sep 2023 | Trulicity — benefit assessment §35a | added benefit: not proven | source |
| CIPM (Spain) | 15 Jun 2023 | Indicación terapéutica autorizada: Diabetes Mellitus tipo 2 Trulicity está indicado para el tratamiento de pacientes a p… | not financed by the SNS | source |
| HAS (France) | 2 Dec 2020 | Re-assessment of SMR and ASMR | SMR substantial · ASMR IV | source |
13 further decisions for dulaglutide, across 8 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 6 further source documents.
Related molecules
- tirzepatide — divergent outcome (recommended vs not recommended) on a shared indication
- exenatide — divergent outcome (recommended vs not recommended) on a shared indication
- sitagliptin — divergent outcome (recommended vs other) on a shared indication
- empagliflozin — same ATC class A10B — Diabetes
- dapagliflozin — same ATC class A10B — Diabetes
- semaglutide — same ATC class A10B — Diabetes
Coverage: 18 decisions for dulaglutide from 9 agencies, 2015 to 2024. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class A10B — Diabetes. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.