Last Updated: August 9, 2026

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR COZAAR


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


All Clinical Trials for COZAAR

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT00168857 ↗ A Prospective, Randomised, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Forced-titration, Multicentre, Parallel Group, One Year Treatment Trial to Compare Telmisartan (MICARDIS) 80 mg Versus Losartan (COZAAR) 100 mg, in Hypertensive Type 2 Diabetic Patients With Ove Completed Boehringer Ingelheim Phase 4 2003-07-01 A number of blood pressure lowering drugs in the class known as angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) have been shown to slow the decline in kidney function of patients with type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and kidney disease. Losartan (COZAAR), is one such drug. The purpose of this research study is to determine if after one year of treatment telmisartan (MICARDIS, GLIOSARTAN, KINZAL, KINZALMONO, PREDXAL, PRITOR, SAMERTAN, TELMISARTAN) 80 mg, another blood pressure lowering drug from the ARB class, is as effective as losartan (COZAAR) 100 mg in reducing the level of urinary protein (indicative of improved kidney function).
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.
NCT00275639 ↗ The Effects of Angiotensin II Receptor Blockade on Kidney Function and Scarring After Liver Transplant Completed Mayo Clinic Phase 4 2004-12-01 This research study is being done to study the effects, both good and bad, of calcineurin inhibitors and the drug Cozaar (losartan), on kidney function and kidney scarring following a liver transplant.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for COZAAR

Condition Name

Condition Name for COZAAR
Intervention Trials
Hypertension 27
Healthy 6
Cystic Fibrosis 2
SARS-CoV Infection 2
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for COZAAR
Intervention Trials
Hypertension 27
Kidney Diseases 10
Fibrosis 5
Diabetic Nephropathies 4
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for COZAAR

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for COZAAR
Location Trials
United States 114
China 29
Canada 11
Korea, Republic of 6
Argentina 4
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for COZAAR
Location Trials
Florida 9
California 9
New York 7
Massachusetts 7
Georgia 7
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for COZAAR

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for COZAAR
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Phase 4 24
Phase 3 11
Phase 2/Phase 3 2
[disabled in preview] 11
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for COZAAR
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 54
Terminated 8
Recruiting 7
[disabled in preview] 3
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for COZAAR

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for COZAAR
Sponsor Trials
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. 10
Boehringer Ingelheim 3
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) 3
[disabled in preview] 3
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for COZAAR
Sponsor Trials
Other 90
Industry 38
NIH 11
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Cozaar (Losartan) Clinical Trials, Market Analysis, Patent Status and Forecast

Last updated: July 31, 2026

Cozaar is the original branded formulation of losartan potassium, an angiotensin II receptor blocker approved by the FDA in 1995 for hypertension. Its U.S. composition-of-matter patent expired in 2010, and losartan is now a mature generic product. Clinical development has shifted from branded Cozaar to losartan-based research in cardiovascular, renal, metabolic and inflammatory indications. The commercial market is driven by low-cost generic tablets, combination products such as losartan/hydrochlorothiazide, and demand in emerging markets rather than branded Cozaar sales.

What is Cozaar and how does losartan work?

Cozaar contains losartan potassium, a selective antagonist of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor. Blocking this receptor reduces vasoconstriction and aldosterone activity, lowering blood pressure and reducing pressure-related cardiac and renal injury.

The FDA-approved U.S. indications are:

  • Hypertension in adults and children aged six years and older
  • Reduction of stroke risk in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy
  • Treatment of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension [1]

Cozaar is available as 25 mg, 50 mg and 100 mg tablets. Hyzaar combines losartan with hydrochlorothiazide and has separate regulatory and patent histories.

How does Cozaar compare with other angiotensin receptor blockers?

Losartan was the first widely commercialized angiotensin receptor blocker. Later products, including valsartan, irbesartan, candesartan, telmisartan and olmesartan, compete in the same therapeutic class.

Drug Generic status Main commercial distinction
Losartan Generic Low cost; broad use; uricosuric effect
Valsartan Generic Strong heart-failure and post-infarction positioning
Irbesartan Generic Diabetic nephropathy evidence
Candesartan Generic Heart-failure and hypertension evidence
Telmisartan Generic Long half-life and cardiovascular-risk positioning
Olmesartan Generic Potent blood-pressure reduction; gastrointestinal safety considerations

Losartan retains a competitive position because it is inexpensive, familiar to prescribers and available in multiple fixed-dose combinations. Its shorter half-life than several newer ARBs can limit once-daily blood-pressure control in some patients.

What clinical trials support Cozaar and losartan?

The main evidence base comes from large completed cardiovascular and renal outcome trials rather than new branded Cozaar development.

LIFE trial

The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study compared losartan with atenolol in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. Losartan produced a greater reduction in the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, stroke and myocardial infarction, with the difference driven substantially by fewer strokes [2].

The LIFE findings supported the FDA indication for reducing stroke risk in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy.

RENAAL trial

The Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan study evaluated patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Losartan reduced the risk of doubling serum creatinine, end-stage renal disease or death compared with placebo, with the strongest effect on progression to end-stage renal disease [3].

The trial established losartan as a renal-protective treatment in diabetic nephropathy, although the drug did not eliminate the need for blood-pressure control, glycemic management or other kidney-protective therapy.

HEAAL trial

The Heart failure Endpoint evaluation of Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan study compared high-dose losartan, 150 mg daily, with 50 mg daily in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction who were intolerant of ACE inhibitors. The higher dose reduced the composite endpoint of death or heart-failure hospitalization, primarily through fewer hospitalizations [4].

HEAAL supported dose optimization in selected heart-failure patients but did not create a new branded Cozaar indication in the United States.

Current clinical-trial direction

As of June 2024, losartan research is principally investigator-led or disease-specific. The active development themes include:

  • Pulmonary hypertension and vascular remodeling
  • Chronic kidney disease and proteinuria
  • Heart failure and cardiac remodeling
  • Aortic disease and connective-tissue disorders
  • Hypertension in pediatric and special populations
  • Metabolic and inflammatory conditions
  • COVID-19-related endothelial or pulmonary complications

These studies generally evaluate losartan as an inexpensive repurposed ARB. They do not represent a conventional branded-drug lifecycle program, and most are unlikely to support premium pricing without a new indication, formulation or biomarker-defined population.

When did Cozaar lose U.S. exclusivity?

Cozaar lost practical U.S. market exclusivity when its principal losartan patent expired in 2010. The original U.S. patent was U.S. Patent No. 5,138,069, assigned to E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. The patent covered losartan and related compounds and had an expiration date in 2010 based on its filing and patent-term history.

The FDA approved Cozaar on April 14, 1995. Pediatric exclusivity later added six months to certain listed patent and exclusivity periods, but it did not prevent eventual generic entry. Generic losartan products entered the U.S. market after expiration of the primary patent barrier.

Cozaar patent and exclusivity timeline

Event Date or period
U.S. patent covering losartan issued 1992
FDA approval of Cozaar April 14, 1995
Pediatric exclusivity Six months added to applicable protection
Principal U.S. patent expiration 2010
Generic losartan commercialization Beginning in 2010
Current U.S. status Mature generic market

The brand has no economically meaningful U.S. market exclusivity based on the original compound patent.

What is the Orange Book status of Cozaar?

The Orange Book historically listed Cozaar and related patent information submitted by the innovator. For a mature product such as losartan, the commercially relevant Orange Book issue is no longer the original compound patent. It is whether any currently listed patents cover a specific branded formulation, method of use or combination product.

Plain losartan tablets have extensive generic competition. Generic applicants can rely on an Abbreviated New Drug Application pathway and may use Paragraph IV certifications when relevant patents are listed.

What patents protect Hyzaar and other losartan formulations?

Hyzaar combines losartan potassium with hydrochlorothiazide. Combination-product patents and formulation patents can have different expiration dates from the original losartan compound patent. Their practical value has diminished because:

  • Hydrochlorothiazide is an established generic ingredient.
  • Multiple manufacturers sell losartan/hydrochlorothiazide.
  • Physicians can prescribe the components separately.
  • Generic manufacturers can design around inactive-ingredient or dosage-form claims.

Patent protection for any specific losartan product must be assessed against the current FDA Orange Book entry, issued patents, terminal disclaimers and litigation history. The original Cozaar compound patent alone does not protect current generic losartan products.

Which companies challenged Cozaar patents?

Generic manufacturers, including major U.S. and international producers, entered the losartan market after the principal patent barrier expired. The competitive field has included companies such as Teva, Mylan, Sandoz, Lupin, Zydus, Torrent, Aurobindo and other regional manufacturers, depending on dosage strength, product presentation and jurisdiction.

The U.S. market is no longer defined by a single major Paragraph IV dispute. The principal commercial event was generic entry following expiration of the core patent. Later patent disputes, where relevant, have focused more on combinations, formulations, manufacturing processes or specific regulatory certifications than on basic losartan.

What is the FDA regulatory status of Cozaar?

Cozaar is an FDA-approved prescription drug. Losartan generic tablets are approved under abbreviated applications demonstrating pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence to the reference product.

The FDA labeling includes important safety and use restrictions:

  • Contraindication with aliskiren in patients with diabetes
  • Fetal toxicity risk during pregnancy
  • Monitoring of renal function and potassium
  • Risk of hyperkalemia
  • Possible renal impairment in susceptible patients
  • Interaction concerns with NSAIDs and other renally active medicines

The FDA has also investigated nitrosamine contamination in certain angiotensin receptor blocker products. Losartan recalls have occurred when batches contained unacceptable levels of impurities such as NDMA or NDEA. These events affected specific manufacturers and lots, not the entire pharmacologic class or every losartan product [5].

How strong is the patent estate for Cozaar?

The current patent estate is weak for plain losartan tablets and stronger only in narrow product configurations.

Patent category Current protection profile
Losartan composition of matter Expired
Standard losartan tablets Broad generic competition
Losartan/hydrochlorothiazide combinations Historically protected; largely generic today
New dosage forms Potentially protectable if technically distinct
Pediatric or special-population use Limited commercial value without enforceable claims
Manufacturing processes Possible narrow protection; usually design-around risk
New combination therapy Potentially stronger if clinically differentiated

A new patent could protect a specific crystalline form, delivery system, fixed-dose combination, impurity-control process or use in a defined patient population. Such claims would not restore the original Cozaar franchise. They would create a separate, narrower product opportunity.

What generic entry risks exist for Cozaar?

Generic entry risk is effectively realized rather than prospective. The relevant commercial risks are price erosion, supplier concentration and substitution by competing ARBs.

Generic launch scenarios

Scenario Market effect
Additional low-cost manufacturers enter Further price compression and lower supplier margins
Shortage at a major supplier Temporary price increases or pharmacy substitution
New fixed-dose combinations gain share Standalone losartan volume declines
ARB prescribing shifts to newer generics Cozaar and losartan lose class share
Regulatory action on contaminated lots Short-term allocation disruption
Contracting favors a single supplier Volume concentrates while prices fall

The most credible near-term risk is not an abrupt patent-driven launch. It is continued commoditization, with periodic supply volatility caused by manufacturing concentration or quality-related recalls.

What is the market size and commercial outlook for Cozaar?

Cozaar brand revenue is small relative to its historical peak because generic losartan dominates prescriptions. Public company disclosures typically report losartan within broader cardiovascular or generic portfolios rather than as a separately identifiable global brand.

The commercial market divides into four segments:

  1. Standalone losartan tablets
  2. Losartan/hydrochlorothiazide combinations
  3. Hospital and institutional supply
  4. Retail generic prescriptions in emerging markets

Revenue is concentrated in volume, not price. Unit demand remains supported by the prevalence of hypertension, diabetes and chronic kidney disease, but average selling prices remain low.

Market drivers

  • Rising hypertension prevalence
  • Greater diagnosis and treatment in middle-income countries
  • Continued use in diabetic nephropathy
  • Availability of once-daily tablets
  • Low procurement cost
  • Established safety and efficacy evidence

Market constraints

  • Intense generic competition
  • Low branded differentiation
  • Substitution by other ARBs
  • Fixed-dose combination competition
  • Reimbursement pressure
  • Periodic nitrosamine-related recalls
  • Limited ability to raise prices without supply disruption

What is the forecast for the Cozaar and losartan market?

Through 2028, the losartan market is likely to remain stable in unit demand but flat to declining in nominal revenue in mature markets. Volume growth in emerging markets should offset part of the decline in North America, Western Europe and Japan.

Forecast period Expected direction
2024-2025 Stable demand; continued generic price pressure
2026-2027 Modest volume growth in emerging markets; mature-market revenue erosion
2028 and beyond Mature commodity market; value concentrated in combinations and reliable supply

The brand Cozaar is unlikely to regain material U.S. market share without a new clinical claim, differentiated delivery technology or a major supply problem affecting generics. A repurposing strategy could create value only if a new indication is supported by prospective outcome data and protected by enforceable intellectual property.

How does Cozaar compare with losartan competitors?

Losartan competes effectively on price and availability but has limited differentiation against other generic ARBs.

Commercial factor Cozaar/losartan position
Clinical evidence Strong historical evidence
Generic availability Extensive
Brand premium Minimal in the U.S.
Renal evidence Strong in diabetic nephropathy
Heart-failure evidence Relevant but less dominant than newer guideline-preferred regimens
Formulation differentiation Limited
Patent strength Weak for standard tablets
Emerging-market potential Moderate
Investment attractiveness Manufacturing and supply-chain driven

The highest-value opportunities are likely to involve reliable production, combination products, emerging-market distribution and repurposed indications rather than the original Cozaar brand.

What licensing deals affect Cozaar?

Cozaar was developed and commercialized by Merck. The principal commercial structure is the original innovator-led franchise followed by broad generic licensing and manufacturing activity after patent expiry.

No major current licensing transaction is required to explain the product’s commercial status. The important business relationships now involve generic supply, contract manufacturing, regional commercialization and combination-product distribution. Any valuation should separate residual branded sales from losartan API and finished-dose supply contracts.

What is the litigation status for Cozaar?

The core U.S. patent litigation cycle ended with generic entry after expiration of the principal patent. Current litigation exposure is more likely to arise from:

  • Product liability claims
  • Manufacturing contamination or recall events
  • Generic quality disputes
  • ANDA patent litigation involving a specific combination or formulation
  • Competition and supply-contract disputes

The historical market-entry dispute is therefore less relevant than regulatory compliance, manufacturing controls and product availability.

Key Takeaways

  • Cozaar is the branded version of losartan potassium and was FDA-approved in 1995.
  • The principal U.S. losartan patent expired in 2010, and generic entry is established.
  • LIFE, RENAAL and HEAAL provide the core clinical evidence for hypertension, diabetic nephropathy and selected heart-failure use.
  • Current losartan research is mainly repurposing or investigator-led research, not branded Cozaar development.
  • Standard losartan tablets have weak commercial patent protection and extensive generic competition.
  • Hyzaar and other fixed-dose combinations have separate patent and regulatory histories.
  • Cozaar brand revenue is no longer the main value pool; generic volume, manufacturing reliability and emerging-market demand are more important.
  • The market outlook is stable in units but pressured in price through 2028.
  • New commercial value would require a differentiated formulation, protected combination, new indication or supply-chain advantage.

FAQs

Is Cozaar still sold in the United States?

Yes. Cozaar may remain available as a brand product, but losartan potassium is primarily dispensed as a generic. Pharmacy substitution and payer formularies generally favor generic losartan.

Is losartan more effective than valsartan?

Neither drug is universally superior. Both lower blood pressure and have cardiovascular evidence. Selection depends on indication, dose, tolerability, renal status, formulary position and clinician preference.

Does Cozaar have remaining patent protection?

The original losartan compound patent has expired. Any remaining protection must be evaluated at the level of a particular combination, formulation, manufacturing process or method-of-use patent.

Are there biosimilars for Cozaar?

No. Cozaar is a small-molecule drug, not a biologic. The relevant competitors are generic losartan products, not biosimilars.

Can losartan be launched under a 505(b)(2) application?

A 505(b)(2) pathway could be relevant to a materially differentiated losartan product, such as a new dosage form, delivery system or combination. Standard losartan tablets generally use the ANDA pathway because they reference the approved product and do not require a new clinical development program.

References

  1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2023). Cozaar (losartan potassium) prescribing information.
  2. Dahlof, B., Devereux, R. B., Kjeldsen, S. E., et al. (2002). Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study. The Lancet, 359(9311), 995-1003.
  3. Brenner, B. M., Cooper, M. E., de Zeeuw, D., et al. (2001). Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. The New England Journal of Medicine, 345(12), 861-869.
  4. Konstam, M. A., Neaton, J. D., Dickstein, K., et al. (2009). Effects of high-dose versus low-dose losartan on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure. The Lancet, 374(9704), 1840-1848.
  5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). FDA updates and recalls involving angiotensin II receptor blockers and nitrosamine impurities.
  6. U.S. Patent No. 5,138,069. (1992). Imidazole derivatives, pharmaceutical compositions and methods of treatment. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

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.