Sofosbuvir: 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
AIFA (Italy), CIPM (Spain) and CONITEC (Brazil), among others, recommended or restricted sofosbuvir, while AWMSG (Wales) did not recommend it.
PHARMAC (New Zealand) has been easier on sofosbuvir than on its own caseload: it refused 0 of 5 decisive submissions here (0%), against a base rate of 29% across everything it has assessed.
Assessment has run over 10 years, from 6 Jan 2014 at AWMSG (Wales) to 29 Jan 2024 at CIPM (Spain).
G-BA (Germany) changed its position: recommended on 17 Jul 2014, restricted by 21 Jan 2021.
No assessment is on file from SMC (Scotland), which is among the eight highest-volume agencies here.
The file is active: 4 of 29 records date from 2023 or later.
6 distinct indication wordings are recorded for sofosbuvir by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, NICE and PBAC).
5 of these 29 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 sofosbuvir, on 6 Jan 2014; CIPM (Spain) did not open a file until 29 Jan 2024 — an unusually long tail of 10 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 10 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 6 of 22 decisive outcomes narrowed sofosbuvir to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at G-BA (Germany), NICE (England) and PHARMAC (New Zealand) among others.
6 of the 11 agencies here assessed sofosbuvir more than once, PHARMAC (New Zealand) most often at 8 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
11 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for sofosbuvir.
The full ledger for sofosbuvir reads 14 recommended, 6 restricted, 4 other and 2 not recommended, with 3 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIPM (Spain) | 29 Jan 2024 | Indicación terapéutica autorizada: Epclusa está indicado para el tratamiento de la infección crónica por el virus de la … | financed by the SNS · art. 92 a, c | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 13 Apr 2023 | Hepatitis C, second-line after prior direct-acting antiviral treatment | PTAC advice: No Formal Recommendation | source |
| G-BA (Germany) | 21 Jan 2021 | Sovaldi — benefit assessment §35a | added benefit: non-quantifiable (hint) | source |
| HAS (France) | 2 Dec 2020 | Indication extension | SMR substantial · ASMR V | source |
| AWMSG (Wales) | 13 Nov 2020 | In combination with other medicinal products for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) in paediatric patients aged … | not endorsed (non-submission) | source |
24 further decisions for sofosbuvir, across 10 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 17 further source documents.
Related molecules
- sofosbuvir / velpatasvir / voxilaprevir — divergent outcome (recommended vs no benefit) on a shared indication
- ledipasvir / sofosbuvir — divergent outcome (recommended vs restricted) on a shared indication
- ombitasvir / paritaprevir / ritonavir — divergent outcome (recommended vs restricted) on a shared indication
- letermovir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
- raltegravir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
- cabotegravir — same ATC class J05A — Antivirals
Coverage: 29 decisions for sofosbuvir from 11 agencies, 2014 to 2024. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class J05A — Antivirals. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.