Paracetamol: 4 agencies, 2003–2026
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
PHARMAC (New Zealand) has been harder on paracetamol than on its own caseload: it refused 5 of 6 decisive submissions here (83%), against a base rate of 29% across everything it has assessed.
The file has been open for more than a decade: 23.1 years separate the first record, 16 Apr 2003 at HAS (France), from the most recent, 20 May 2026 at HAS (France).
PHARMAC (New Zealand) changed its position: not recommended on 8 May 2008, recommended by 30 Nov 2022, after a resubmission.
No assessment is on file from SMC (Scotland), AWMSG (Wales), TLV (Sweden) and G-BA (Germany), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
Not every gap is a refusal: for paracetamol, 4 were withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
The file is active: 16 of 106 records date from 2023 or later.
2 of these 106 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 paracetamol, on 16 Apr 2003; CIPM (Spain) did not open a file until 29 Sep 2022 — an unusually long tail of 19.4 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 19 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 19 years in total.
4 of the 4 agencies here assessed paracetamol more than once, HAS (France) most often at 94 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
Coverage is narrow: only 4 of the 18 agencies here have assessed paracetamol.
The full ledger for paracetamol reads 74 recommended, 23 other, 5 not recommended and 4 withdrawn.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HAS (France) | 20 May 2026 | Listing (Transparency Committee) | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| HAS (France) | 18 Mar 2026 | Listing (Transparency Committee) | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| CIPM (Spain) | 24 Apr 2025 | Indicaciones terapéuticas autorizadas: Tratamiento sintomático del dolor de intensidad leve a moderada y estados febrile… | excluded from SNS provision · art. 92 e | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 24 Sep 2020 | Analgesia | PTAC advice: Decline · decision reached | source |
| PBAC (Australia) | 2014 | Pain | The PBAC rejected the submission on the basis that no bioequivalence statement had been pr… | source |
101 further decisions for paracetamol, across 4 agencies, are not shown here. They include the most recent record on file, 20 May 2026 from HAS (France); its outcome is in the subscriber dataset. They link to 72 further source documents.
Related molecules
- pregabalin — same ATC class N02B — Analgesics
- paracetamol / tramadol — same ATC class N02B — Analgesics
- ziconotide — same ATC class N02B — Analgesics
- methoxyflurane — same ATC class N02B — Analgesics
- teplizumab — also decided by HAS in 2026Q2
- axicabtagene ciloleucel — also decided by HAS in 2026Q2
Coverage: 106 decisions for paracetamol from 4 agencies, 2003 to 2026. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class N02B — Analgesics. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.