Last Updated: May 30, 2026

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR CORLANOR


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


All Clinical Trials for CORLANOR

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT02827500 ↗ Predischarge Initiation of Ivabradine in the Management of Heart Failure (PRIME-HF) Completed Amgen Phase 4 2016-07-01 The PRIME-HF study is a multi-center, patient-level, randomized, open-label study of approximately 450 patients with reduced (left ventricular ejection fraction) LVEF of ≤ 35% and heart-rate ≥70 beats per minute (bpm) who are being discharged from the hospital following stabilization from acute heart failure (HF)(primary or secondary) and will be randomized to a treatment strategy of predischarge initiation of ivabradine or usual care. All participants should have a follow-up visit within 7-14 days of hospital discharge. Heart rate and systolic blood pressure will be assessed at this clinical visit. For participants randomized to predischarge initiation of ivabradine and on ivabradine 5mg BID, the heart rate may be used to adjust the dose the dose to 2.5mg BID or 7.5mg BID. For participants randomized to usual care, ivabradine may be initiated at the provider's discretion. All participants will have a second follow-up study visit 6 weeks (42 +/- 14 days) post-discharge. Heart rate, systolic blood pressure and quality of life (KCCQ and PGA) will be assessed. For participants already taking ivabradine in either treatment group, the heart rate may again be used to adjust the dose of ivabradine. For participants not yet receiving ivabradine, it may be initiated at the provider's discretion. All participants will receive a 90 (+/-7) day post-discharge phone call by site to assess for event status and tolerability of ivabradine. All participants will have a final study visit at 180 (+/-14) days post-discharge. Heart rate, systolic blood pressure and quality of life (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and Patient Global Assessment) will be assessed. The attending physician may initiate ivabradine per usual care clinical practice. The primary hypothesis of the PRIME-HF study is that, compared with usual care, a treatment strategy of initiation of ivabradine prior to discharge for a hospitalization with acute HF will be associated with a greater proportion of participants using ivabradine at 180 days. Secondary objectives are to assess the impact of predischarge initiation of ivabradine on:Heart Rate (Change in heart rate from baseline to 180 days and Median heart rate at 180 days) and Patient-Centered Outcomes (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and Patient Global Assessment (PGA)). Tertiary objectives will be to explore the impact of predischarge initiation of ivabradine on other assessments of evidence-based implementation of ivabradine and beta-blockers at 180 days. Evaluations will incorporate data based on whether or not indication status was retained and whether or not an ivabradine prescription was provided. Tolerability of ivabradine and adverse events during study follow-up.
NCT02827500 ↗ Predischarge Initiation of Ivabradine in the Management of Heart Failure (PRIME-HF) Completed Duke University Phase 4 2016-07-01 The PRIME-HF study is a multi-center, patient-level, randomized, open-label study of approximately 450 patients with reduced (left ventricular ejection fraction) LVEF of ≤ 35% and heart-rate ≥70 beats per minute (bpm) who are being discharged from the hospital following stabilization from acute heart failure (HF)(primary or secondary) and will be randomized to a treatment strategy of predischarge initiation of ivabradine or usual care. All participants should have a follow-up visit within 7-14 days of hospital discharge. Heart rate and systolic blood pressure will be assessed at this clinical visit. For participants randomized to predischarge initiation of ivabradine and on ivabradine 5mg BID, the heart rate may be used to adjust the dose the dose to 2.5mg BID or 7.5mg BID. For participants randomized to usual care, ivabradine may be initiated at the provider's discretion. All participants will have a second follow-up study visit 6 weeks (42 +/- 14 days) post-discharge. Heart rate, systolic blood pressure and quality of life (KCCQ and PGA) will be assessed. For participants already taking ivabradine in either treatment group, the heart rate may again be used to adjust the dose of ivabradine. For participants not yet receiving ivabradine, it may be initiated at the provider's discretion. All participants will receive a 90 (+/-7) day post-discharge phone call by site to assess for event status and tolerability of ivabradine. All participants will have a final study visit at 180 (+/-14) days post-discharge. Heart rate, systolic blood pressure and quality of life (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and Patient Global Assessment) will be assessed. The attending physician may initiate ivabradine per usual care clinical practice. The primary hypothesis of the PRIME-HF study is that, compared with usual care, a treatment strategy of initiation of ivabradine prior to discharge for a hospitalization with acute HF will be associated with a greater proportion of participants using ivabradine at 180 days. Secondary objectives are to assess the impact of predischarge initiation of ivabradine on:Heart Rate (Change in heart rate from baseline to 180 days and Median heart rate at 180 days) and Patient-Centered Outcomes (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and Patient Global Assessment (PGA)). Tertiary objectives will be to explore the impact of predischarge initiation of ivabradine on other assessments of evidence-based implementation of ivabradine and beta-blockers at 180 days. Evaluations will incorporate data based on whether or not indication status was retained and whether or not an ivabradine prescription was provided. Tolerability of ivabradine and adverse events during study follow-up.
NCT02973594 ↗ Pulse Reduction On Beta-blocker and Ivabradine Therapy Recruiting American Heart Association Phase 4 2016-11-01 Heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) is the most common form of chronic heart failure in subjects ≤ 75 years of age. Beta-blocker therapy greatly reduces mortality and improves ventricular function in HFrEF patients, but 30-40% of patients do not show improvement in ventricular function with beta blockade. An extensive gene signaling network downstream from the beta1-adrenergic receptor, the primary target of beta-blocker therapy is likely important for development and progression HFrEF. Pathologic changes in this gene signaling network are only reversed towards normal levels when ventricular function improves. One potential mechanism for failure to improve ventricular function in HFrEF patients unresponsive to beta blocker therapy is a lack of heart rate reduction. Ivabradine is an FDA-approved medication believed to have therapeutic benefit in HFrEF patients through reduction in heart rate independent of beta-blockade. Ivabradine has been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization for worsening HF in patients with stable, symptomatic chronic heart failure with reduced EF (≤ 35%)in sinus rhythm with resting heart rate ≥ 70 bpm and who are on maximally tolerated doses of beta blockers or who have a contraindication to beta blockers. Given the high rate of mortality and hospitalization of HFrEF patients even with current therapies, there is a large unmet need for improving HFrEF therapy. The goals of this study are to test the hypothesis that heart rate reduction is an important antecedent for improvement in ventricular function, and to identify components of the beta1-adrenergic receptor gene signaling network responsible for improvement in ventricular function caused by heart rate reduction.
NCT02973594 ↗ Pulse Reduction On Beta-blocker and Ivabradine Therapy Recruiting Ohio State University Phase 4 2016-11-01 Heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) is the most common form of chronic heart failure in subjects ≤ 75 years of age. Beta-blocker therapy greatly reduces mortality and improves ventricular function in HFrEF patients, but 30-40% of patients do not show improvement in ventricular function with beta blockade. An extensive gene signaling network downstream from the beta1-adrenergic receptor, the primary target of beta-blocker therapy is likely important for development and progression HFrEF. Pathologic changes in this gene signaling network are only reversed towards normal levels when ventricular function improves. One potential mechanism for failure to improve ventricular function in HFrEF patients unresponsive to beta blocker therapy is a lack of heart rate reduction. Ivabradine is an FDA-approved medication believed to have therapeutic benefit in HFrEF patients through reduction in heart rate independent of beta-blockade. Ivabradine has been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization for worsening HF in patients with stable, symptomatic chronic heart failure with reduced EF (≤ 35%)in sinus rhythm with resting heart rate ≥ 70 bpm and who are on maximally tolerated doses of beta blockers or who have a contraindication to beta blockers. Given the high rate of mortality and hospitalization of HFrEF patients even with current therapies, there is a large unmet need for improving HFrEF therapy. The goals of this study are to test the hypothesis that heart rate reduction is an important antecedent for improvement in ventricular function, and to identify components of the beta1-adrenergic receptor gene signaling network responsible for improvement in ventricular function caused by heart rate reduction.
NCT02973594 ↗ Pulse Reduction On Beta-blocker and Ivabradine Therapy Recruiting University of Utah Phase 4 2016-11-01 Heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) is the most common form of chronic heart failure in subjects ≤ 75 years of age. Beta-blocker therapy greatly reduces mortality and improves ventricular function in HFrEF patients, but 30-40% of patients do not show improvement in ventricular function with beta blockade. An extensive gene signaling network downstream from the beta1-adrenergic receptor, the primary target of beta-blocker therapy is likely important for development and progression HFrEF. Pathologic changes in this gene signaling network are only reversed towards normal levels when ventricular function improves. One potential mechanism for failure to improve ventricular function in HFrEF patients unresponsive to beta blocker therapy is a lack of heart rate reduction. Ivabradine is an FDA-approved medication believed to have therapeutic benefit in HFrEF patients through reduction in heart rate independent of beta-blockade. Ivabradine has been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization for worsening HF in patients with stable, symptomatic chronic heart failure with reduced EF (≤ 35%)in sinus rhythm with resting heart rate ≥ 70 bpm and who are on maximally tolerated doses of beta blockers or who have a contraindication to beta blockers. Given the high rate of mortality and hospitalization of HFrEF patients even with current therapies, there is a large unmet need for improving HFrEF therapy. The goals of this study are to test the hypothesis that heart rate reduction is an important antecedent for improvement in ventricular function, and to identify components of the beta1-adrenergic receptor gene signaling network responsible for improvement in ventricular function caused by heart rate reduction.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for CORLANOR

Condition Name

Condition Name for CORLANOR
Intervention Trials
Heart Failure 3
Tachycardia 1
Ventricular Remodeling 1
Cardiogenic Shock 1
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for CORLANOR
Intervention Trials
Heart Failure 5
Ventricular Remodeling 1
Heart Failure, Systolic 1
Cardiomyopathy, Dilated 1
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for CORLANOR

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for CORLANOR
Location Trials
United States 22
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for CORLANOR
Location Trials
Michigan 3
Ohio 2
New York 2
Illinois 2
Colorado 2
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for CORLANOR

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for CORLANOR
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Phase 4 5
Phase 3 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for CORLANOR
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 2
Unknown status 2
Withdrawn 1
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for CORLANOR

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for CORLANOR
Sponsor Trials
Amgen 5
Duke University 1
American Heart Association 1
[disabled in preview] 2
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for CORLANOR
Sponsor Trials
Other 7
Industry 6
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial
Last updated: May 23, 2026

Corlanor (ivabradine) Clinical Trials Update, Market Analysis, and Revenue Projection (2026–2035)

Corlanor (ivabradine) is an established oral therapy for chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in patients in sinus rhythm with elevated heart rate. Clinical activity over the next cycle is dominated by (1) investigator-initiated and regional label-expansion studies in cardio-metabolic and arrhythmia-adjacent settings and (2) lifecycle trials aimed at dose, real-world outcomes, and comparative safety rather than a clean generics/biosimilars-style product reset.

Market performance is shaped by: guideline positioning in HFrEF, payer coverage dynamics for “sinus rhythm + heart-rate” criteria, substitution risk from beta-blocker optimization, and competition from newer CHF management options (including SGLT2 inhibitors and ARNI-based regimens) that reduce incremental demand for ivabradine.

This update focuses on clinical-trial direction, competitive positioning, and a projection framework that can be used for R&D planning, licensing strategy, and investment modeling.


What is the latest clinical trials landscape for CORLANOR (ivabradine)?

Corlanor’s clinical trial ecosystem is smaller than newer CHF agents, with most activity concentrated on (1) identifying subgroups with better heart-rate reduction and (2) real-world effectiveness and adherence outcomes under modern background therapy (ARNI, SGLT2 inhibitors, MRAs).

Key clinical trial themes

  • HFrEF optimization with heart-rate targeting: Trials and analyses that track outcomes stratified by baseline heart rate and on-treatment heart rate reduction, reflecting ivabradine’s mechanism (selective If current inhibition).
  • Concomitant therapy interaction: Studies designed around “standard of care” modern CHF combinations, checking additive effects and safety when SGLT2 inhibitors and ARNI are common.
  • Safety and tolerability in broader practice: Longer-term tolerability endpoints (bradycardia, visual phenomena, conduction disturbances) and management protocols.
  • Extension and implementation studies: Registry-like and pragmatic designs that measure adherence, dose persistence, and discontinuation reasons.

Where new efficacy signals are most likely to emerge

  • Patients with persistent tachycardia despite maximally tolerated beta-blockers remain the highest-likelihood segment for any incremental label or outcomes claim.
  • Comorbidity-heavy cohorts (renal dysfunction, older adults) are a frequent target for lifecycle studies because they can generate payer-relevant safety and persistence evidence even when core efficacy is established.

How trial endpoints map to commercial impact

Ivabradine trials typically translate into commercial value through:

  • stronger evidence for hospitalization reduction and symptom improvement metrics that align with payer priorities,
  • subgroup claims tied to baseline heart-rate and beta-blocker intolerance patterns.

What endpoints and inclusion criteria drive CORLANOR trial success in HFrEF?

Featured-snippet view: the commercial and clinical relevance of Corlanor trials is dominated by sinus rhythm enrollment, elevated heart rate thresholds, and background CHF therapy consistency.

Common trial structure

  • Population: Chronic HFrEF, sinus rhythm, elevated resting heart rate.
  • Stratification: Baseline heart-rate bands and beta-blocker exposure status (tolerant vs intolerant).
  • Dose strategy: Titration to achieve target resting heart rate without symptomatic bradycardia.
  • Endpoints: Composite of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization (or hospitalization endpoints), plus bradycardia and vision-related AEs.

Regulatory and payer translation

  • Programs designed to support label language emphasize:
    • “sinus rhythm”
    • “heart-rate criterion”
    • outcomes that matter in reimbursement decisions (hospitalization, QoL, intolerance criteria).

How does CORLANOR fit into current CHF treatment guidelines and competitive positioning?

Corlanor is a targeted bradycardia/heart-rate lowering add-on within a multi-drug HFrEF regimen. Its competitive position is not “class replacement” but incremental benefit where heart-rate remains high.

Commercial implications of guideline architecture

  • If a payer expects background therapy optimization (ARNI/SGLT2i/MRA + beta-blocker), ivabradine demand concentrates in the residual group that remains tachycardic or is unable to use adequate beta-blocker dosing.
  • As CHF treatment patterns shift, the “addressable” pool can expand (if beta-blocker tolerance falls in real-world practice) or shrink (if clinicians increasingly prioritize titration and alternative regimens that reduce HR without ivabradine).

What patents protect CORLANOR (ivabradine) and how does exclusivity work?

Executable answer depends on jurisdiction-specific Orange Book and patent-family data. This requires a live dossier extract; without it, the patent-and-expiration timeline cannot be stated accurately.

(Per operating constraints, no incomplete or non-verifiable patent claims are provided.)


What is the Orange Book status of CORLANOR?

This requires current Orange Book listing retrieval for the exact drug product(s), strengths, and dosage forms, including listed patents by expiration and any pediatric exclusivity extensions. Under constraints, no partial status is provided.


Are there Paragraph IV challenges or generic entry risks for CORLANOR?

Paragraph IV and any settlement entry timelines require court-docket and FDA Orange Book challenge records tied to specific listed patents and drug-product presentation. Without verifiable inputs, this cannot be quantified.


How strong is the patent estate for ivabradine in the US and key EU markets?

Patent strength and litigation risk depend on (1) active listed patents per product presentation, (2) remaining terms, and (3) historical claim construction and validity outcomes. A firm strength assessment requires case-level and listing-level sources and cannot be produced from incomplete data under constraints.


Which companies are competing with CORLANOR in HFrEF today?

Competition for ivabradine is indirect but persistent: it comes from other heart-rate lowering and CHF disease-modifying classes.

Competitive set by treatment function

  • Heart-rate lowering alternatives
    • beta-blockers (titration-optimized)
    • rate-controlling cardiology drugs used off-label (pattern varies by country)
  • Disease-modifying CHF classes that compete for regimen share
    • ARNI (e.g., sacubitril/valsartan)
    • SGLT2 inhibitors
    • MRAs
    • disease-modifying add-ons and sequencing strategies

Where Corlanor retains differentiation

  • “Residual tachycardia in sinus rhythm” after beta-blocker optimization
  • “Beta-blocker intolerance” subpopulations where clinicians need a heart-rate reduction option without beta-blocker physiologic effects

What is the market size for ivabradine/Corlanor and what are drivers of demand?

A numeric market model requires product-revenue inputs by country and year. Under constraints, no market sizing numbers are provided without verifiable citation-backed data.

Demand drivers

  • HFrEF prevalence and guideline adoption
  • increasing emphasis on heart-rate control in sinus rhythm
  • payer coverage criteria aligned with sinus rhythm and HR thresholds
  • clinical familiarity and prescriber routines

Demand headwinds

  • beta-blocker titration improvements and adherence improvements
  • substitution pressure from alternative CHF regimens that reduce hospitalization risk without explicit HR targeting
  • off-label use variability across geographies (impacts reimbursement and forecasting)

How should CORLANOR revenue be projected through 2035? (Model framework)

A projection must be scenario-based and tied to adoption of modern CHF combination therapy, HR control criteria, and generic pressure (where applicable). Without verified baseline revenue and patent expiry timelines, only a model structure is provided.

Projection model structure (scenario build)

Use three scenarios:

  1. Base case: Stable share in eligible sinus-rhythm/tachycardia residual population; modest volume erosion from regimen optimization.
  2. Downside: Faster-than-expected replacement by optimized beta-blocker and background disease-modifying therapies that reduce hospitalizations and drive more aggressive regimen titration.
  3. Upside: Real-world persistence improves due to better titration protocols and payer alignment around HR criteria; incremental use in beta-blocker intolerant patients.

Key variables that must be calibrated to local data

  • Eligible pool size (HFrEF prevalence × sinus rhythm fraction × elevated HR threshold fraction)
  • Dose persistence (discontinuation rate, titration success, bradycardia management)
  • Payer formulary positioning (prior authorization, step edits)
  • Competitive class sequencing behavior (how often ivabradine is used vs beta-blocker escalation)
  • Product pricing and reimbursement trends

Outputs

  • Volume (TRx), net revenue (after rebates/discounts), and margin profile by scenario
  • Segment mix by line of therapy and patient subgroup

What commercial events could change CORLANOR trajectory (pricing, access, labeling, supply)?

Commercial trajectory typically changes due to:

  • formulary decisions and step therapy rules based on HR criteria
  • label updates or guideline revisions that tighten or broaden “residual tachycardia” patient identification
  • pricing resets and tender cycles in government procurement markets
  • supply constraints or changes in manufacturing footprint

Any attempt to forecast the timing of these events requires dated evidence.


Key Takeaways

  • Corlanor’s future is driven by its role as a heart-rate targeting add-on in sinus rhythm HFrEF where tachycardia persists or beta-blockers are insufficient.
  • Clinical development is expected to emphasize subgroup outcomes and real-world tolerability and persistence rather than a new major mechanism claim.
  • Market evolution depends on the fraction of patients who remain eligible after modern multi-drug CHF regimens and on payer access policies tied to HR criteria.
  • A revenue projection through 2035 must be scenario-based and calibrated to (a) eligible pool size, (b) persistence, (c) payer access, and (d) patent/generic risk, with country-by-country patent and Orange Book/EC status informing the timeline.

FAQs

1) What are Corlanor’s main clinical use restrictions and how do HR criteria affect prescribing?
2) How do SGLT2 inhibitor and ARNI adoption change the addressable population for ivabradine?
3) What safety signals are most relevant for long-term ivabradine dosing in older HFrEF patients?
4) How does beta-blocker intolerance influence Corlanor uptake across different healthcare systems?
5) What are the most likely endpoints regulators and payers prioritize for any new ivabradine lifecycle indication?


References

No sources were cited because no verifiable, up-to-date clinical-trials registry extracts, FDA labeling/Orange Book records, or market sizing datasets were included in the provided material.

More… ↓

⤷  Start Trial

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.