Teriflunomide: 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
AWMSG (Wales), NICE (England) and NYE METODER (Norway), among others, recommended or restricted teriflunomide, while CIPM (Spain) and PBAC (Australia) did not recommend it.
On the same population the two systems disagree outright: SMC (Scotland) recorded restricted for “Treatment of adults with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (MS).”, while PBAC (Australia) recorded not recommended for “Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS)”.
Assessment has run over 8.9 years, from 14 Jun 2013 at AWMSG (Wales) to 12 May 2022 at AWMSG (Wales).
TLV (Sweden) changed its position: not recommended on 23 May 2014, recommended by 27 Jun 2016, after a resubmission.
Every one of the eight highest-volume agencies in this archive has a record for teriflunomide.
3 distinct indication wordings are recorded for teriflunomide by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, NICE, PBAC and SMC).
1 of these 18 records carries a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
AWMSG (Wales) was first to assess teriflunomide, on 14 Jun 2013; CIPM (Spain) did not open a file until 3 Mar 2022 — an unusually long tail of 8.8 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 6 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 5 of 14 decisive outcomes narrowed teriflunomide to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at AWMSG (Wales), NICE (England) and PHARMAC (New Zealand) among others.
5 of the 10 agencies here assessed teriflunomide more than once, HAS (France) most often at 4 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
10 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for teriflunomide.
The full ledger for teriflunomide reads 5 restricted, 5 not recommended, 4 recommended and 2 no benefit, with 2 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AWMSG (Wales) | 12 May 2022 | Treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in children aged 10-17 years | recommended with restrictions (licence extension for paediatric use) | source |
| HAS (France) | 30 Mar 2022 | Indication extension | SMR insufficient | source |
| CIPM (Spain) | 3 Mar 2022 | inmunosupresores, Inmunosupresor selectivo. L04AA31 Indicación terapéutica autorizada: AUBAGIO está indicado para el tra… | not financed by the SNS | source |
| G-BA (Germany) | 20 Jan 2022 | Aubagio — benefit assessment §35a | added benefit: not proven | source |
| NYE METODER (Norway) | 21 Nov 2021 | Behandling av barn og ungdom (10-18 år) med relapserende remitterende multippel sklerose | introduced | source |
13 further decisions for teriflunomide, across 9 agencies, are not shown here. They link to 11 further source documents.
Related molecules
- ublituximab — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- cladribine — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- diroximel — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- alemtuzumab — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- dimethyl — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
- ozanimod — divergent outcome (restricted vs recommended) on a shared indication
Coverage: 18 decisions for teriflunomide from 10 agencies, 2013 to 2022. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class L04A — Immunosuppressants. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.