Raltegravir: 7 agencies, 2008–2019
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 raltegravir: all 16 decisive outcomes across 7 agencies were positive or positive with restrictions.
Assessment has run over 11 years, from 2 Apr 2008 at HAS (France) to 17 Apr 2019 at HAS (France).
AWMSG (Wales) changed its position: recommended on 25 Nov 2008, restricted by 10 Dec 2015.
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 raltegravir, 1 submission was never made — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
Nothing has been added since 2019; on this evidence the file is dormant.
The programme is broad: 8 distinct indication wordings are recorded for raltegravir by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, PBAC and SMC).
2 of these 25 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 raltegravir, on 2 Apr 2008; CONITEC (Brazil) did not open a file until 4 Sep 2017 — an unusually long tail of 9.4 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 8 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 10 of 16 decisive outcomes narrowed raltegravir to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at AWMSG (Wales), SMC (Scotland) and TLV (Sweden).
5 of the 7 agencies here assessed raltegravir more than once, HAS (France) most often at 8 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
7 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for raltegravir.
The full ledger for raltegravir reads 10 restricted, 6 recommended, 6 other and 1 advice, with 2 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HAS (France) | 17 Apr 2019 | Indication extension | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 10 Jan 2019 | HIV | funding application decided · decision reached | source |
| SMC (Scotland) | 9 Jul 2018 | in combination with other anti-retroviral medicinal products in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus in neonates. | not recommended | source |
| CONITEC (Brazil) | 4 Sep 2017 | Primeira linha de tratamento de pessoas vivendo com HIV/Aids | incorporated into SUS | source |
| PBAC (Australia) | 2017 | Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection | The PBAC was of a mind to recommend raltegravir 600 mg tablets be listed on the PBS for th… | source |
20 further decisions for raltegravir, across 6 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 15 further source documents.
Related molecules
- dolutegravir — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- lenacapavir — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- dolutegravir / lamivudine — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- dolutegravir / rilpivirine — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- tenofovir — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- sofosbuvir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
Coverage: 25 decisions for raltegravir from 7 agencies, 2008 to 2019. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class J05A — Antivirals. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.