Objectives: There are no international guidelines on how the requirements for added clinical value (endpoints) should be prepared in terms of drug safety by entities performing health technology assessments (HTAs). The study aimed to review the Danish Medicines Council's drug safety endpoints Methods: Safety endpoints prepared by the Danish Medicines Council's expert committees were reviewed from their assessment reports for 50 treatments, of which 25 were for the treatment of cancer and 25 were for the treatment of other types of diseases. Similarities and differences were identified Results: The 139 endpoints for safety were grouped into 14 categories. The use of endpoints varied and all endpoints were based on an expert assessment. Serious adverse reactions/events were used as an endpoint in most of the cases: 43.2% (N=60)/15.8% (N=22), following treatment discontinuation based on four different causes 16.4% (N=32). A numerical grading scale for adverse events were predominately used for endpoints for cancer treatment (19.8%, N=20 vs. 2.1%, N=2) Conclusions: The variation in the use of endpoints reflects the complexity of safety assessments and the need for more standardization to promote stringency and transparency. The authors propose five recommendations for actions, which may promote more generalizability and transparency. International HTA entities and researchers are also encouraged to investigate the possibilities of establishing a universal grading system for adverse events and to develop international guidelines for safety assessment in HTAs. Public interest abstract: New medicines often have to be evaluated against the treatment already available in order to compare effectiveness, safety and price. If one treatment is superior, it will often be referred to as having added clinical value. This evaluation is known as a health technology assessment (HTA). All medicines can cause side effects and the assessment of safety in HTAS is therefore essential. No international guidelines for drug safety assessment in HTAs however exist. The requirements for safety prepared by the Danish Medicines Council's expert committees were therefore reviewed from their assessment reports for 50 treatments in order to present their approach to drug safety assessment. A total of 139 safety requirements, also referred to as endpoints, were identified. The use of endpoints varied which reflects the complexity of safety assessments and the need for more standardization to promote stringency. The authors propose five recommendations for actions, which may promote more generalizability and transparency in Denmark and internationally.