Teriparatide: 8 agencies, 2003–2025
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
On the same population the two systems disagree outright: AWMSG (Wales) recorded recommended for “Treatment of osteoporosis in men at increased risk of fracture”, while SMC (Scotland) recorded not recommended for “For the treatment of osteoporosis in men at increased risk of fracture.”.
The file has been open for more than a decade: 21.9 years separate the first record, 8 Dec 2003 at SMC (Scotland), from the most recent, 25 Nov 2025 at TLV (Sweden).
AWMSG (Wales) changed its position: not recommended on 19 Jan 2009, recommended by 20 Jun 2025, after a resubmission.
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Not every gap is a refusal: for teriparatide, 1 was withdrawn or terminated before a decision — an outcome set by the company rather than the assessor.
The file is active: 7 of 27 records date from 2023 or later.
6 distinct indication wordings are recorded for teriparatide by the agencies that label one in English (AWMSG, PBAC and SMC).
3 of these 27 records carry a year of decision but no day, so any interval quoted here is approximate to within a year.
SMC (Scotland) was first to assess teriparatide, on 8 Dec 2003; CONITEC (Brazil) did not open a file until 21 Jul 2022 — an unusually long tail of 18.6 years between the earliest and latest system to look at it.
The record arrives in waves: 11 separate years each carry two or more decisions, spread across 14 years in total.
Restriction is doing real work here: 6 of 20 decisive outcomes narrowed teriparatide to a subgroup rather than accepting or refusing it outright, at PHARMAC (New Zealand), SMC (Scotland) and TLV (Sweden).
8 of the 8 agencies here assessed teriparatide more than once, HAS (France) most often at 8 entries — repeat review is the norm for this molecule rather than the exception.
8 of the 18 agencies in this archive hold a record for teriparatide.
The full ledger for teriparatide reads 11 recommended, 6 restricted, 4 other and 3 not recommended, with 3 in other categories.
Decisions on file
| Agency | Date | Indication as recorded | Outcome | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PBAC (Australia) | 2025 | Osteoporosis | Recommended | source |
| PHARMAC (New Zealand) | 15 Nov 2024 | Osteoporosis, treatment for clinical vertebral fractures, 1st line | PTAC advice: Low | source |
| CONITEC (Brazil) | 20 Sep 2024 | Tratamento de osteoporose secundária a glicocorticoides, pacientes do sexo masculino e pacientes que apresentaram infart… | excluded from SUS | source |
| AOTMIT (Poland) | 13 Nov 2023 | Forsteo reimbursement recommendation | recommended | source |
| AWMSG (Wales) | 3 May 2019 | Indicated in adults for the treatment of osteoporosis in post-menopausal women and men at increased risk of fracture. In… | outside AWMSG criteria | source |
22 further decisions for teriparatide, across 8 agencies, are not shown here. They include the most recent record on file, 25 Nov 2025 from TLV (Sweden); its outcome is in the subscriber dataset. They link to 14 further source documents.
Related molecules
- palopegteriparatide — same ATC class H05A — Calcium homeostasis
- abaloparatide — same ATC class H05A — Calcium homeostasis
- guselkumab — also decided by TLV in 2025Q4
- adalimumab — also decided by TLV in 2025Q4
- omalizumab — also decided by TLV in 2025Q4
- ustekinumab — also decided by TLV in 2025Q4
Coverage: 27 decisions for teriparatide from 8 agencies, 2003 to 2025. Data to 7 Sep 2026. ATC class H05A — Calcium homeostasis. How this page is produced. Compiled by Altima Partners; queries: sales@altimapartners.co.uk.