CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR ANDROID 25

All Clinical Trials for ANDROID 25

Trial ID	Title	Status	Sponsor	Phase	Start Date	Summary
NCT02107014 ↗	Low Dose Naltrexone (LDN) Immune Monitoring	Completed	Stanford University	N/A	2014-03-01	We have found that low dose naltrexone (LDN) can substantially reduce pain associated with fibromyalgia syndrome. We believe LDN may work via novel anti-inflammatory channels. The purpose of this study is to determine if LDN lowers inflammatory markers in individuals with fibromyalgia.
NCT02107014 ↗	Low Dose Naltrexone (LDN) Immune Monitoring	Completed	University of Alabama at Birmingham	N/A	2014-03-01	We have found that low dose naltrexone (LDN) can substantially reduce pain associated with fibromyalgia syndrome. We believe LDN may work via novel anti-inflammatory channels. The purpose of this study is to determine if LDN lowers inflammatory markers in individuals with fibromyalgia.
NCT02897934 ↗	CWI and Discharge After Breast Cancer Surgery	Completed	University College Cork		2016-08-01	The objectives of this work are threefold: 1. To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of CWI in women discharged within 23 hours of major breast cancer surgery 2. To evaluate objective indices of patient recovery following anaesthesia and surgery in a 23 hour model of care 3. To evaluate patient satisfaction with their care pathway
NCT03387787 ↗	Evaluation of Glycaemic Control Using GlucoTab® With Insulin Degludec in Hospitalized Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Type 2	Completed	University Hospital Inselspital, Berne	Phase 2/Phase 3	2018-01-30	The GlucoTab® system is a computerized decision support system built of an android based front-end user interface and a backend server including the REACTION algorithm. GlucoTab® is able to process blood glucose data and physiological confounders of glycaemia. Subsequently, GlucoTab® provides patient-specific basal, bolus, and correction insulin doses together with visualization and documentation of relevant data. The GlucoTab® system was found capable to keep hospitalized diabetic patients in the recommended target range without increasing the risk for hypoglycaemic events. Insulin pharmacokinetic is a critical confounder of glycaemic variability and the main determinant of an algorithm-based decision support-system. GlucoTab® is intended for being used with a basal/bolus insulin regimen. Up to date, feasibility data are limited to the use of insulin glargine. Insulin degludec, an ultra-long acting basal insulin is characterized by a stable pharmacokinetic profile a half-life of ~25 hours. It was found equally effective to insulin glargine with respect to glycaemic control, while the incidence of (nocturnal) hypoglycaemia was smaller in patients treated with insulin degludec. Within the present study, insulin glargine will be replaced by insulin degludec, which is not yet approved for dose titration with GlucoTab®. In the present study, 15 non-critically ill T2DM patients, who were hospitalized at the University Clinic of Neurosurgery for various reasons and require insulin treatment will be recruited. Patients will be treated with insulin Tresiba and insulin Novorapid. For a maximum duration of 21 days, GlucoTab® will calculate the required insulin doses for each patient, depending on fasting plasma glucose and postprandial glucose measurements during the day. After the calculated Insulin dose has been approved by the physician, the nursing staff will give the dose to the respective patient. The present study will analyse the efficacy of GlucoTab® for glycaemic management in T2DM patients using insulin degludec.
NCT03953326 ↗	HeartPhone Cancer Survivors Trial 2019	Terminated	Penn State University	Phase 1/Phase 2	2019-04-23	This is a behavioral study that will examine changes in physical activity and vascular health in response to a digital tool (app) that will appear on participant's lock screen of their Android phone. Participants will be asked to use this app for 3 months and to wear a Fitbit device continuously throughout the study. Participants will be asked to complete questionnaires, participate in fitness testing and measures of cardiovascular health at 3 months and 6 months after baseline assessments. The hypothesis is that exposure to the app will lead to increased physical activity volume and improved microvessel function.
NCT03979352 ↗	Effect of SGLT2i in Conjunction With the Artificial Pancreas on Improving the Glycemia in T1DM in the Outpatient Setting	Unknown status	McGill University Health Center	Phase 3	2019-08-01	The most advanced configurations of the Artificial Pancreas (AP) have not yet been demonstrated to sufficiently maximize time in target glycemia. One limitation is the challenge of postprandial glycemic control, which currently requires ongoing patient engagement for accurate and detailed bolus dose estimation for meals. Sodium Glucose Linked Transporter 2 Inhibition (SGLT2i) provides an additional mechanism to attenuate post-prandial glycemic excursion, and may represent a strategy that could further alleviate carbohydrate counting burden and improve the performance of AP configurations. This trial aims to compare - using a randomized, masked placebo-controlled, crossover, multicenter design - the efficacy of the SGLT2i empagliflozin 25 mg oral per day each in the setting of single-hormone automated AP and conventional insulin pump therapy on the proportion of time spent in target and in hypoglycemia each during a 4-week day-and-night period. The pilot trial aims to enroll 28 adult patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) across 2 research sites (one in Toronto and one in Montreal) and includes a 2- week therapy optimization run-in period, 4-weeks for each of the two AP intervention arms, and a 1- week washout in between the pharmacological intervention sequences. Glucose levels will be measured by continuous glucose monitoring (G5, Dexcom Inc.). Insulin will be infused using a subcutaneous infusion pump (t-slim, Tandem Diabetes Care) and communication between pumps and the algorithm will be implemented using Android Smartphone devices and Bluetooth technology communication.

Clinical Trial Conditions for ANDROID 25

Condition Name

Condition Name for ANDROID 25
Intervention	Trials
Breast Cancer	2
Nicotine Addiction	1
Occipital Neuralgia	1
Diabetes Mellitus	1

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for ANDROID 25
Intervention	Trials
Diabetes Mellitus	3
Hemorrhage	1
Tobacco Use Disorder	1
Fibromyalgia	1

Clinical Trial Locations for ANDROID 25

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for ANDROID 25
Location	Trials
Canada	4
United States	3
Switzerland	2
Ireland	1

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for ANDROID 25
Location	Trials
Vermont	1
Pennsylvania	1
California	1

Clinical Trial Progress for ANDROID 25

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for ANDROID 25
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
Phase 4	2
Phase 3	1
Phase 2/Phase 3	1

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for ANDROID 25
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
Completed	3
Recruiting	3
Not yet recruiting	2

Clinical Trial Sponsors for ANDROID 25

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for ANDROID 25
Sponsor	Trials
Stanford University	2
Walid HABRE	1
University of Vermont	1

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for ANDROID 25
Sponsor	Trials
Other	18

Last updated: May 26, 2026

Android 25 clinical trials update, market analysis, and revenue projection

Executive summary

No actionable patent- and FDA-market analysis can be produced for “Android 25” because the drug is not uniquely identifiable from the provided input. “Android 25” does not map to a specific, verifiable active ingredient, INN/USAN, brand name, sponsor, FDA application, or clinical-trial registry identifier. Without a uniquely identified molecule and development program, clinical-trials status, competitive set, regulatory pathway, and revenue projections cannot be stated with factual precision.

What is “Android 25” and what active ingredient does it contain?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

What details are required to identify the program in FDA and registries?

• Active ingredient (INN/USAN)
• Brand name and dosage form(s)
• Sponsor and developer
• Intended indication(s)
• Route (oral, IV, inhaled, topical, etc.)
• FDA application identifier (NDA/BLA) or at least the reference product and pathway (505(b)(2), 505(j), BLA, etc.)
• Trial registry IDs (NCT/EudraCT/ISRCTN) tied to the same product

What clinical trials are ongoing for Android 25 (NCT updates, recruitment status, phase)?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Trial status fields that must be tied to the same product

• Phase (1/2/3)
• Recruitment status (active, recruiting, suspended, completed)
• Enrollment size and primary endpoints
• Readouts (top-line and full dataset dates)
• Safety signals and dose escalation outcomes
• Trial locations and arms (control, placebo, SOC comparator)
• Sponsor and contract research organization ownership

What endpoints and results have been reported for Android 25 so far?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Results elements typically used for market-and-risk scoring

• Efficacy: endpoint definitions and effect sizes vs comparator or placebo
• Safety: AE incidence, discontinuations, serious AEs, lab abnormalities
• PK/PD: exposure-response (where available)
• Subgroup efficacy: biomarker-defined responses
• Dose-response: recommended Phase 3 dose rationale

When does Android 25 have potential FDA approval and launch timing?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Timing drivers that determine approval windows

• Phase completion dates for primary endpoints
• NDA/BLA submission date
• FDA review clock and PDUFA date
• Label scope and required confirmatory studies
• Risk management and REMS requirements (if any)
• Generic or biosimilar protection landscape readiness

What is the Orange Book status of Android 25 (patent listings, exclusivity, barriers)?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

What must be identified before Orange Book can be analyzed

• Correct NDA/BLA record
• Listed patents (composition, method-of-use, formulation, manufacturing)
• Expiration dates for each patent family
• Exclusivity types: NCE, 505(b)(2) exclusivity, pediatric, orphan, breakthrough, etc.
• Any existing ANDA/BLA application litigation signaling (e.g., Paragraph IV history)

How strong is the patent estate for Android 25 (composition, method-of-use, formulation)?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

What gets scored in a patent-portfolio strength review

• Breadth: claim coverage across salts, polymorphs, crystal forms, hydrates
• Depth: dependent claim strategy and enforcement-friendly independent claims
• Obviousness and enablement risk
• Prior art exposure and prosecution history
• Geographic coverage: US, EP, JP, CN key jurisdictions
• Transfer or licensing structures affecting leverage

Which generic or biosimilar entry risks exist for Android 25?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Risk pathways that change the projection

• ANDA Paragraph IV likelihood (for small molecules)
• 351(k) biosimilar pathway likelihood (for biologics)
• “Skinny label” and carve-out opportunities
• Formulation workarounds around protected dosage forms
• Exclusivity vs patent expiry order (hard-to-soft exclusivity transitions)

What FDA regulatory pathway does Android 25 use (NDA, BLA, 505(b)(2), Fast Track, Breakthrough)?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Key regulatory elements that drive approval probability and label timing

• Whether it is NME/NCE eligible
• Surrogate endpoints acceptability (accelerated approval potential)
• Whether it has Breakthrough Therapy, Fast Track, RMAT designations
• Whether confirmatory trials are planned and their status
• Label risk: class warnings, contraindications, monitoring requirements

How does Android 25 compare with competing drugs in its therapeutic class?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Benchmarking inputs used in go-to-market forecasting

• Clinical advantage: efficacy and safety differentials
• Dosing convenience and adherence profile
• Administration setting: inpatient vs outpatient
• Reimbursement risk: payer restrictions and step edits
• Differentiated subpopulation targeting vs incumbents

Market size and demand: What revenue can Android 25 capture and when?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Revenue model components that cannot be set without product identity

• Indication(s) and patient population sizing methodology
• Incumbent share, competitive erosion expectations, and class dynamics
• Pricing assumptions (WAC, net price, discounting, rebates)
• Uptake curve (penetration vs time to guideline inclusion)
• Market access strategy and formulary adoption timelines
• Loss of exclusivity timeline for first wave of generics/biosimilars

Revenue projection scenarios for Android 25 (base, bull, bear)

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

What the scenarios require

• Clinical probability of success by phase
• Expected launch date and time to peak sales
• Competitive set and assumed market share range
• Patent/exclusivity runway for label durability
• FDA label breadth and contraindication constraints

What clinical trial, regulatory, or manufacturing risks could delay Android 25?

Answer: Not determinable from the supplied information.

Common risk categories that must be tied to the actual program

• Enrollment delays and site activation issues
• Endpoint ambiguity or underpowered studies
• Safety signals causing dose holds or protocol amendments
• CMC issues affecting batch release and scale-up readiness
• Intercurrent illness and adherence issues for chronic indications

Key Takeaways

• “Android 25” cannot be mapped to a unique drug candidate from the provided input.
• Clinical-trials update, regulatory status, competitive landscape, patent barriers, and revenue projections require an unambiguous identification of active ingredient and development program.

FAQs

1. How do I identify the correct FDA record for a drug candidate when only a nickname is provided?
2. What clinical-trial milestones most strongly predict Phase 3 success?
3. How do exclusivity periods interact with patent expiry in ANDA Paragraph IV risk modeling?
4. What label elements most affect payer uptake and launch net pricing?
5. Which factors drive time-to-peak sales for new entrants in oncology, immunology, and CNS?

References

No sources cited because “Android 25” is not uniquely identifiable from the provided information.