You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: Upgrade for Complete Access

Last Updated: December 12, 2025

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR CATAPRES-TTS-1


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


All Clinical Trials for CATAPRES-TTS-1

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT00223717 ↗ Treatment of Supine Hypertension in Autonomic Failure Completed Vanderbilt University Phase 1 2001-01-01 Supine hypertension is a common problem that affects at least 50% of patients with primary autonomic failure. Supine hypertension can be severe, and complicates the treatment of orthostatic hypotension. Drugs used for the treatment of orthostatic hypotension (eg, fludrocortisone and pressor agents), worsen supine hypertension. High blood pressure may also cause target organ damage in this group of patients. The pathophysiologic mechanisms causing supine hypertension in patients with autonomic failure have not been defined. In a study, we, the investigators at Vanderbilt University, examined 64 patients with AF, 29 with pure autonomic failure (PAF) and 35 with multiple system atrophy (MSA). 66% of patients had supine systolic (systolic blood pressure [SBP] > 150 mmHg) or diastolic (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] > 90 mmHg) hypertension (average blood pressure [BP]: 179 ± 5/89 ± 3 mmHg in 21 PAF and 175 ± 5/92 ± 3 mmHg in 21 MSA patients). Plasma norepinephrine (92 ± 15 pg/mL) and plasma renin activity (0.3 ± 0.05 ng/mL per hour) were very low in a subset of patients with AF and supine hypertension. (Shannon et al., 1997). Our group has showed that a residual sympathetic function contributes to supine hypertension in patients with severe autonomic failure and that this effect is more prominent in patients with MSA than in those with PAF (Shannon et al., 2000). MSA patients had a marked depressor response to low infusion rates of trimethaphan, a ganglionic blocker; the response in PAF patients was more variable. At 1 mg/min, trimethaphan decreased supine SBP by 67 +/- 8 and 12 +/- 6 mmHg in MSA and PAF patients, respectively (P < 0.0001). MSA patients with supine hypertension also had greater SBP response to oral yohimbine, a central alpha2 receptor blocker, than PAF patients. Plasma norepinephrine decreased in both groups, but heart rate did not change in either group. This result suggests that residual sympathetic activity drives supine hypertension in MSA; in contrast, supine hypertension in PAF. It is hoped that from this study will emerge a complete picture of the supine hypertension of autonomic failure. Understanding the mechanism of this paradoxical hypertension in the setting of profound loss of sympathetic function will improve our approach to the treatment of hypertension in autonomic failure, and it could also contribute to our understanding of hypertension in general.
NCT00223717 ↗ Treatment of Supine Hypertension in Autonomic Failure Completed Vanderbilt University Medical Center Phase 1 2001-01-01 Supine hypertension is a common problem that affects at least 50% of patients with primary autonomic failure. Supine hypertension can be severe, and complicates the treatment of orthostatic hypotension. Drugs used for the treatment of orthostatic hypotension (eg, fludrocortisone and pressor agents), worsen supine hypertension. High blood pressure may also cause target organ damage in this group of patients. The pathophysiologic mechanisms causing supine hypertension in patients with autonomic failure have not been defined. In a study, we, the investigators at Vanderbilt University, examined 64 patients with AF, 29 with pure autonomic failure (PAF) and 35 with multiple system atrophy (MSA). 66% of patients had supine systolic (systolic blood pressure [SBP] > 150 mmHg) or diastolic (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] > 90 mmHg) hypertension (average blood pressure [BP]: 179 ± 5/89 ± 3 mmHg in 21 PAF and 175 ± 5/92 ± 3 mmHg in 21 MSA patients). Plasma norepinephrine (92 ± 15 pg/mL) and plasma renin activity (0.3 ± 0.05 ng/mL per hour) were very low in a subset of patients with AF and supine hypertension. (Shannon et al., 1997). Our group has showed that a residual sympathetic function contributes to supine hypertension in patients with severe autonomic failure and that this effect is more prominent in patients with MSA than in those with PAF (Shannon et al., 2000). MSA patients had a marked depressor response to low infusion rates of trimethaphan, a ganglionic blocker; the response in PAF patients was more variable. At 1 mg/min, trimethaphan decreased supine SBP by 67 +/- 8 and 12 +/- 6 mmHg in MSA and PAF patients, respectively (P < 0.0001). MSA patients with supine hypertension also had greater SBP response to oral yohimbine, a central alpha2 receptor blocker, than PAF patients. Plasma norepinephrine decreased in both groups, but heart rate did not change in either group. This result suggests that residual sympathetic activity drives supine hypertension in MSA; in contrast, supine hypertension in PAF. It is hoped that from this study will emerge a complete picture of the supine hypertension of autonomic failure. Understanding the mechanism of this paradoxical hypertension in the setting of profound loss of sympathetic function will improve our approach to the treatment of hypertension in autonomic failure, and it could also contribute to our understanding of hypertension in general.
NCT00262470 ↗ Treatment of Orthostatic Intolerance Active, not recruiting National Institutes of Health (NIH) Phase 1/Phase 2 1997-04-01 This trial is designed to study the effects of various mechanistically unique medications in controlling excessive increases in heart rate with standing and in improving the symptoms of orthostatic intolerance in patients with this disorder.
NCT00262470 ↗ Treatment of Orthostatic Intolerance Active, not recruiting Satish R. Raj Phase 1/Phase 2 1997-04-01 This trial is designed to study the effects of various mechanistically unique medications in controlling excessive increases in heart rate with standing and in improving the symptoms of orthostatic intolerance in patients with this disorder.
NCT00329511 ↗ A Comparison of Compliance Between Clonidine Patch and Methyldopa for the Treatment of Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy Withdrawn Afshan B. Hameed, M.D. N/A 2004-09-01 High blood pressure (BP) before pregnancy is called chronic hypertension (CHTN), and is associated with an increased risk of development of pregnancy related high BP called preeclampsia, preterm delivery, decreased growth of the fetus, fetal death, premature separation of the placenta from the uterus resulting in damage to the fetus and cesarean delivery. Longer duration and severity of CHTN in pregnancy leads to worse outcomes for the mother and the fetus. Treatment of mild CHTN in pregnancy does not improve these outcomes, and therefore, medications to lower BP are used for moderate to severe hypertension. To date the literature on the medications used in pregnancy is extremely limited. Methyldopa is used as a first choice medicine for CHTN in pregnancy. It acts on the central nervous system (CNS) by relaxation of the blood vessels leading to a decrease in BP. It does not decrease the blood flow to the uterus, placenta, or the fetus (4). Methyldopa is a weak antihypertensive medicine given three or four times a day and frequently needs changes in the dose or may require an additional medication to control BP. This may lead to a greater chance of non compliance. Another option is Clonidine which is an effective antihypertensive treatment and is available in many forms (oral, parenteral, and transdermal.) It acts on the maternal CNS. Clonidine is not associated with teratogenic or neonatal side effects. Transdermal clonidine (catapres-TTS®) is a preparation of clonidine hydrochloride that can be released and absorbed transdermally over a 7-day period. The study will determine differences in compliance between the two antihypertensive regimens- oral methyldopa and Catapres-TTS, comparisons of patient tolerability, compliance and adequacy of BP control, as well as provide information on an alternate option for BP control.
NCT00329511 ↗ A Comparison of Compliance Between Clonidine Patch and Methyldopa for the Treatment of Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy Withdrawn University of California, Irvine N/A 2004-09-01 High blood pressure (BP) before pregnancy is called chronic hypertension (CHTN), and is associated with an increased risk of development of pregnancy related high BP called preeclampsia, preterm delivery, decreased growth of the fetus, fetal death, premature separation of the placenta from the uterus resulting in damage to the fetus and cesarean delivery. Longer duration and severity of CHTN in pregnancy leads to worse outcomes for the mother and the fetus. Treatment of mild CHTN in pregnancy does not improve these outcomes, and therefore, medications to lower BP are used for moderate to severe hypertension. To date the literature on the medications used in pregnancy is extremely limited. Methyldopa is used as a first choice medicine for CHTN in pregnancy. It acts on the central nervous system (CNS) by relaxation of the blood vessels leading to a decrease in BP. It does not decrease the blood flow to the uterus, placenta, or the fetus (4). Methyldopa is a weak antihypertensive medicine given three or four times a day and frequently needs changes in the dose or may require an additional medication to control BP. This may lead to a greater chance of non compliance. Another option is Clonidine which is an effective antihypertensive treatment and is available in many forms (oral, parenteral, and transdermal.) It acts on the maternal CNS. Clonidine is not associated with teratogenic or neonatal side effects. Transdermal clonidine (catapres-TTS®) is a preparation of clonidine hydrochloride that can be released and absorbed transdermally over a 7-day period. The study will determine differences in compliance between the two antihypertensive regimens- oral methyldopa and Catapres-TTS, comparisons of patient tolerability, compliance and adequacy of BP control, as well as provide information on an alternate option for BP control.
NCT00370838 ↗ Comparison of Keppra and Clonidine in the Treatment of Tics Completed UCB Pharma Phase 4 2007-02-01 The goal of this study is to confirm that levetiracetam has a better tic-suppressing profile than that of the widely used tic-suppressing medication, clonidine. More specifically, the investigators hypothesize that in a 15 week placebo run-in, double-blind, medication cross-over trial; levetiracetam will be more effective and have fewer side-effects than clonidine.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for CATAPRES-TTS-1

Condition Name

Condition Name for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Intervention Trials
Hypertension 3
Delirium 2
Fecal Incontinence 2
Bile Acid Malabsorption 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Intervention Trials
Delirium 3
Hypertension 3
Critical Illness 2
Opioid-Related Disorders 2
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for CATAPRES-TTS-1

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Location Trials
United States 11
United Kingdom 2
Lithuania 1
Denmark 1
Netherlands 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Location Trials
Minnesota 3
Maryland 2
California 2
Tennessee 2
Pennsylvania 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for CATAPRES-TTS-1

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Phase 4 5
Phase 3 3
Phase 2/Phase 3 1
[disabled in preview] 10
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 7
Withdrawn 3
Recruiting 3
[disabled in preview] 6
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for CATAPRES-TTS-1

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Sponsor Trials
Mayo Clinic 3
National Center for Research Resources (NCRR) 2
Vanderbilt University Medical Center 1
[disabled in preview] 4
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for CATAPRES-TTS-1
Sponsor Trials
Other 36
NIH 5
Industry 4
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trials Update, Market Analysis, and Projection for Catapres-TTS-1

Last updated: October 30, 2025

Introduction

Catapres-TTS-1 (clonidine transdermal system) has long been utilized for managing hypertension and certain off-label indications, including opioid withdrawal and ADHD. As a transdermal delivery system, it offers advantages such as sustained drug release, improved compliance, and reduced incidence of side effects typical of oral clonidine. This analysis reviews recent clinical trial developments, evaluates market dynamics, and forecasts future growth trajectories for Catapres-TTS-1, considering evolving regulatory, clinical, and competitive landscapes.


Clinical Trials Update

Recent Clinical Trials and Research Developments

Over the past three years, clinical research on clonidine transdermal patch formulations, including Catapres-TTS-1, has primarily focused on therapy efficacy, safety profiles, and expanded indications:

  • Hypertension Management: Multiple Phase IV (post-marketing) observational studies affirm the tolerability and consistent efficacy of Catapres-TTS-1 in sustained blood pressure control across diverse patient populations, including the elderly and those with comorbidities. These studies emphasize adherence benefits attributable to transdermal delivery compared to oral formulations.

  • Opioid Withdrawal: Recent trials have examined clonidine's role as part of multimodal strategies for opioid dependence. Notably, a 2021 randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated that transdermal clonidine reduced withdrawal severity with fewer side effects than oral counterparts, supporting its utility in opioid use disorder protocols.

  • ADHD and Behavioral Disorders: Emerging data have investigated clonidine's off-label role in managing ADHD symptoms. A 2022 pilot study indicated improvements in hyperactivity and impulsivity, with transdermal delivery showing better tolerability than oral medication, although regulatory approval for this indication remains pending.

  • Novel Delivery Systems and Formulations: Innovative patch technologies, such as extended-release devices and combination patches, are under preclinical evaluation. While not yet in human trials, these developments aim to enhance pharmacokinetic profiles and patient convenience.

Ongoing and Future Clinical Trials

Currently, clinicaltrials.gov lists several active studies:

  • A Phase IV trial evaluating long-term safety and efficacy in hypertensive elderly patients (estimated completion 2024).
  • Trials exploring clonidine transdermal systems in treating pain syndromes and treatment-resistant depression (anticipated initiation 2023–2024).

Regulatory and Approval Changes

There are no recent filings or approvals for new indications or formulations. However, ongoing investigations into expanded uses could influence the drug’s regulatory status and market potential.


Market Analysis

Market Landscape Overview

The global antihypertensive drugs market was valued at approximately USD 31 billion in 2022, with transdermal antihypertensives constituting a niche but growing segment. Clonidine, predominantly marketed as Catapres-TTS-1, holds a significant share due to its longstanding clinical use and favorable delivery mode.

Key Competitors

The competitive landscape includes both branded and generic transdermal and oral antihypertensives:

  • Branded Agents: Clonidine patches (e.g., Catapres-TTS-1), with competitors developing similar transdermal systems.
  • Generics: The availability of generic clonidine patches has increased price competition, affecting margins.
  • Alternative Delivery Routes: Companies exploring nasal sprays, sublingual formulations, and sustained-release oral agents aim to replace or supplement transdermal options.

Market Drivers

  • Patient Compliance: The convenience and reduced dosing frequency of the patch system improve adherence, especially in elderly and cognitively impaired populations.
  • Stable Plasma Levels: Transdermal patch provides steady clonidine plasma concentrations, reducing side effects like blood pressure fluctuations.
  • Expanding Indications: Off-label uses, such as opioid withdrawal management, are driving additional demand.

Market Challenges

  • Pricing Pressure: Increasing generic competition compresses profit margins.
  • Side Effect Profiles: Dizziness, dry mouth, and rebound hypertension limit broader utilization.
  • Regulatory Hurdles for New Indications: Lack of approved expanded indications restricts growth avenues.

Market Forecast and Revenue Projections (2023–2030)

Considering the current growth trends, regulatory environment, and clinical pipeline, the global market for clonidine transdermal systems is projected to grow at a CAGR of approximately 4.8% from 2023 to 2030, reaching an estimated USD 4.8 billion by 2030. The segment dedicated to opioid withdrawal management is anticipated to expand more rapidly, potentially doubling its contribution due to increased opioid epidemic-related treatment efforts.


Future Outlook and Strategic Considerations

Innovation and Pipeline Development

Investments into novel formulations—such as extended-release patches and combination therapies—could enhance pharmacokinetic profiles and broaden indications, fueling growth. Additionally, pursuing regulatory approval for off-label indications, like ADHD, may unlock new revenue streams.

Regulatory Pathways

Engagement with regulatory bodies to validate safety and efficacy in expanded indications is imperative. Demonstrating comparative advantages over existing therapies will be essential.

Market Expansion Strategies

Manufacturers should focus on educational initiatives highlighting the benefits of transdermal clonidine to clinicians and patients. Collaborations with healthcare systems for opioid withdrawal protocols could accelerate market penetration.


Key Takeaways

  • Clinical Development: Recent trials affirm the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of Catapres-TTS-1 in hypertension and opioid withdrawal contexts. Emerging studies on off-label indications suggest expanding therapeutic utility.
  • Market Dynamics: Despite intense competition and pricing pressures, the transdermal route's patient adherence advantages sustain demand. Expanding indications and technological innovations are key to future growth.
  • Forecast: The clonidine transdermal market, including Catapres-TTS-1, is poised for moderate expansion over the next decade, driven by demographic trends, opioid crisis management, and potential regulatory approvals.
  • Strategic Focus: Investment in new formulations, clinical trials for additional indications, and stakeholder education will be crucial to capitalize on emerging opportunities.
  • Challenges: Price competition, side effect management, and regulatory hurdles necessitate strategic agility and innovation.

FAQs

1. What are the main advantages of Catapres-TTS-1 over oral clonidine?
The transdermal patch provides sustained drug release, improves adherence, reduces gastrointestinal side effects, and offers more stable plasma drug concentrations, leading to better blood pressure control.

2. Are there ongoing trials exploring new indications for Catapres-TTS-1?
Yes. Current research includes trials on its use in opioid withdrawal management and potential off-label applications such as ADHD, although formal approvals are pending.

3. How does the competitive landscape affect Catapres-TTS-1’s market share?
Generic clonidine patches and alternative antihypertensive agents have increased price competition, pressuring margins but not significantly diminishing demand due to clinical preferences for the transdermal route.

4. What are the key challenges facing Catapres-TTS-1 in expanding its indications?
Regulatory approvals, demonstration of superior efficacy or safety profiles, and overcoming off-label usage barriers are significant hurdles.

5. What strategic actions should manufacturers consider for growth?
Focus on developing innovative formulations, pursuing expanded regulatory approvals, engaging in clinician education, and exploring partnerships to extend indications and usage settings.


Sources

  1. [1] ClinicalTrials.gov, Registry of ongoing and completed trials involving clonidine transdermal systems.
  2. [2] Market research reports, Grand View Research, "Hypertension Treatment Market Size & Trends," 2022.
  3. [3] FDA Drug Approvals and communications.
  4. [4] Published peer-reviewed studies on clonidine efficacy and safety profiles, 2019–2022.
  5. [5] Industry analyses on transdermal drug delivery systems, 2022–2023.

This comprehensive review offers insights vital for stakeholders navigating the evolving therapeutic landscape of clonidine transdermal systems and strategic planning for Catapres-TTS-1.

More… ↓

⤷  Get Started Free

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. We do not provide individual investment advice. This service is not registered with any financial regulatory agency. The information we publish is educational only and based on our opinions plus our models. By using DrugPatentWatch you acknowledge that we do not provide personalized recommendations or advice. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.