Enoxaparin: 6 agencies, 2008–2026
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
PBAC (Australia) has been easier on enoxaparin than on its own caseload: it refused 0 of 7 decisive submissions here (0%), against a base rate of 24% across everything it has assessed.
The file has been open for more than a decade: 18.2 years separate the first record, 2 Apr 2008 at HAS (France), from the most recent, 2026 at PBAC (Australia).
No assessment is on file from CIPM (Spain) and G-BA (Germany), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for enoxaparin, 1 was withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
The file is active: 6 of 27 records date from 2023 or later.
The programme is broad: 12 distinct indication wordings are recorded for enoxaparin by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, PBAC and SMC).
12 of these 27 records carry a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
HAS (France) was first to assess enoxaparin, on 2 Apr 2008; TLV (Sweden) did not open a file until 30 Apr 2019 — an unusually long tail of 11 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 6 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 15 years in total.
4 of the 6 agencies here assessed enoxaparin more than once, PBAC (Australia) most often at 12 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 enoxaparin.
The full ledger for enoxaparin reads 18 recommended, 6 other, 1 advice and 1 withdrawn, with 1 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PBAC (Australia) | 2025 | Prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) Treatment of venous thrombosisPrevention of extracorporeal thrombosis during haemodialysisTreatment of acute ST-segment elevati… | Recommended | source |
| HAS (France) | 15 Jun 2022 | Indication extension | SMR insufficient | source |
| TLV (Sweden) | 2 Oct 2019 | Inhixa ingår i högkostnadsskyddet | general subsidy | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 23 May 2019 | patients with lower leg immobilisation | PTAC advice: No Formal Recommendation · decision reached | source |
| AWMSG (Wales) | 1 Jun 2010 | Treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) | recommended (full) | source |
22 further decisions for enoxaparin, across 5 agencies, are not shown here. They include the most recent record on file, 2026 from PBAC (Australia); its outcome is in the subscriber dataset. They link to 10 further source documents.
Related molecules
- rivaroxaban — same ATC class B01A — Antithrombotics
- apixaban — same ATC class B01A — Antithrombotics
- dabigatran — same ATC class B01A — Antithrombotics
- fondaparinux — same ATC class B01A — Antithrombotics
- ticagrelor — same ATC class B01A — Antithrombotics
- clopidogrel — same ATC class B01A — Antithrombotics
Coverage: 27 decisions for enoxaparin from 6 agencies, 2008 to 2026. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class B01A — Antithrombotics. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.