Pioglitazone: 4 agencies, 2002–2025
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
The file has been open for more than a decade: 22.7 years separate the first record, 1 Nov 2002 at PHARMAC (New Zealand), from the most recent, 2025 at PBAC (Australia).
SMC (Scotland) changed its position: not recommended on 9 Aug 2004, restricted by 12 Sep 2005, after a resubmission.
No assessment is on file from HAS (France), AWMSG (Wales), CIPM (Spain) and G-BA (Germany), each among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
1 of these 7 records carries a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
PHARMAC (New Zealand) was first to assess pioglitazone, on 1 Nov 2002; PBAC (Australia) did not open a file until 2025 — an unusually long tail of 22.7 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
Restriction is doing real work here: 2 of 7 decisive outcomes narrowed pioglitazone to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at SMC (Scotland) and TLV (Sweden).
2 of the 4 agencies here assessed pioglitazone more than once, PHARMAC (New Zealand) most often at 3 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 pioglitazone.
The full ledger for pioglitazone reads 4 recommended, 2 restricted and 1 not recommended.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PBAC (Australia) | 2025 | Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) | Recommended | source |
| TLV (Sweden) | 2 Dec 2009 | Vi beslutar att Actos ska ingå i högkostnadsskyddet med begränsning | restricted subsidy | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 6 Nov 2008 | Widening of access to include triple therapy and increasing HbA1c threshold | PTAC advice: Medium · decision reached | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 12 Sep 2005 | Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients for whom metformin is inappropriate | accepted (restricted) | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 9 Aug 2004 | Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients for whom metformin is inappropriate | not recommended | source |
2 further decisions for pioglitazone, across 1 agency, are not shown here. They link to 2 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
- empagliflozin — same ATC class A10B — Diabetes
- dapagliflozin — same ATC class A10B — Diabetes
- semaglutide — same ATC class A10B — Diabetes
- metformin / sitagliptin — same ATC class A10B — Diabetes
Coverage: 7 decisions for pioglitazone from 4 agencies, 2002 to 2025. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class A10B — Diabetes. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.