Glecaprevir / Pibrentasvir: 10 agencies, 2017–2021
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 glecaprevir / pibrentasvir: all 12 decisive outcomes across 7 agencies were positive or positive with restrictions.
The record spans 4.4 years, opening at PBAC (Australia) in 2017 and running to 16 Dec 2021.
No assessment is on file from PHARMAC (New Zealand) and CIPM (Spain), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for glecaprevir / pibrentasvir, 1 was withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.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.
3 distinct indication wordings are recorded for glecaprevir / pibrentasvir by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, PBAC and SMC).
3 of these 20 records carry a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
The systems moved almost together: all 9 agencies opened a file on glecaprevir / pibrentasvir within a year of one another, starting with PBAC (Australia) in 2017.
The record arrives in waves: 5 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 5 years in total.
5 of the 10 agencies here assessed glecaprevir / pibrentasvir more than once, HAS (France) most often at 5 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
10 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for glecaprevir / pibrentasvir.
The full ledger for glecaprevir / pibrentasvir reads 10 recommended, 3 no benefit, 2 advice and 2 restricted, with 3 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G-BA (Germany) | 16 Dec 2021 | Maviret — benefit assessment §35a | added benefit: not proven | source |
| AWMSG (Wales) | 24 Nov 2021 | Treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in children and adolescents aged 3 years to <18 years | recommended (licence extension for paediatric use) | source |
| HAS (France) | 27 Oct 2021 | Listing (Transparency Committee) | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| PBAC (Australia) | 2020 | Chronic hepatitis C infection | The PBAC was of a mind to recommend the listing of an 8-week treatment option of glecaprev… | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 11 Nov 2019 | For treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in adults and in adolescents aged 12 to <18 years. | accepted | source |
15 further decisions for glecaprevir / pibrentasvir, across 10 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 10 further source documents.
Related molecules
- ledipasvir / sofosbuvir — divergent outcome (recommended vs restricted) on a shared indication
- sofosbuvir / velpatasvir / voxilaprevir — divergent outcome (recommended vs no benefit) on a shared indication
- sofosbuvir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
- letermovir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
- raltegravir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
- cabotegravir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
Coverage: 20 decisions for glecaprevir / pibrentasvir from 10 agencies, 2017 to 2021. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class J05A — Antivirals. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.