Ozanimod: 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
DMC (Denmark), G-BA (Germany) and HIRA (South Korea), among others, recommended or restricted ozanimod, while CIPM (Spain) did not recommend it.
On the same population the two systems disagree outright: SMC (Scotland) recorded restricted for “For adult patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis.”, while NICE (England) recorded not recommended in TA706.
The record spans 4.2 years, opening at AWMSG (Wales) on 23 May 2020 and running to 2024.
AOTMIT (Poland) changed its position: not recommended on 14 Jun 2021, restricted by 9 Dec 2022, after a resubmission.
No assessment is on file from HAS (France) and PHARMAC (New Zealand), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for ozanimod, 1 was withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
The file is active: 4 of 24 records date from 2023 or later.
7 distinct indication wordings are recorded for ozanimod by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, NICE, PBAC and SMC).
4 of these 24 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 ozanimod, on 23 May 2020; HIRA (South Korea) did not open a file until 3 Aug 2023 — a wide spread of 3.2 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 4 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 5 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 6 of 18 decisive outcomes narrowed ozanimod to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at AOTMIT (Poland), DMC (Denmark) and HIRA (South Korea) among others.
10 of the 12 agencies here assessed ozanimod more than once, PBAC (Australia) most often at 4 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
ozanimod has been through 12 of the 18 agencies in this archive — among the most widely assessed molecules on file.
The full ledger for ozanimod reads 7 recommended, 6 restricted, 5 not recommended and 2 deferred to NICE, with 4 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PBAC (Australia) | 2024 | Ulcerative colitis | The PBAC rescinded the March 2022 recommendation for ozanimod. | source |
| HIRA (South Korea) | 3 Aug 2023 | 중등도에서 중증의 활동성 궤양성 대장염 | reimbursable only at the evaluated price | source |
| CIPM (Spain) | 24 Jul 2023 | Indicaciones terapéuticas autorizada s: Esclerosis múltiple Zeposia está indicado para el tratamiento de pacientes adult… | not financed by the SNS · art. 92 d | source |
| AOTMIT (Poland) | 9 Dec 2022 | programu lekowego „Leczenie pacjentów z wrzodziejącym zapaleniem jelita grubego (WZJG) (ICD-10: K51) | recommended conditionally | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 10 Oct 2022 | Treatment of adult patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) who have had an inadequate response, lost response, or were intolerant to either co… | accepted | source |
19 further decisions for ozanimod, across 11 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 16 further source documents.
Related molecules
- teriflunomide — divergent outcome (recommended vs restricted) on a shared indication
- adalimumab — same ATC class L04A — Immunosuppressants
- upadacitinib — same ATC class L04A — Immunosuppressants
- secukinumab — same ATC class L04A — Immunosuppressants
- tocilizumab — same ATC class L04A — Immunosuppressants
- ustekinumab — same ATC class L04A — Immunosuppressants
Coverage: 24 decisions for ozanimod from 12 agencies, 2020 to 2024. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L04A — Immunosuppressants. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.