You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: ➤ Start for $299 All access. No Commitment.

Last Updated: December 18, 2025

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR EPIPEN


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


All Clinical Trials for EPIPEN

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT00434421 ↗ Sublingual Cockroach Safety in Adults With Cockroach Allergy & Perennial Allergic Rhinitis With or Without Asthma Completed Inner-City Asthma Consortium Phase 1 2007-02-01 Immunotherapy may help reduce symptoms of allergy and asthma. Problems concerning compliance and adverse events with subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy have generated interest in delivering immunotherapy sublingually (under the tongue). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety of a cockroach extract given sublingually to people with perennial (year-round) allergic rhinitis, with or without asthma.
NCT00434421 ↗ Sublingual Cockroach Safety in Adults With Cockroach Allergy & Perennial Allergic Rhinitis With or Without Asthma Completed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Phase 1 2007-02-01 Immunotherapy may help reduce symptoms of allergy and asthma. Problems concerning compliance and adverse events with subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy have generated interest in delivering immunotherapy sublingually (under the tongue). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety of a cockroach extract given sublingually to people with perennial (year-round) allergic rhinitis, with or without asthma.
NCT00809146 ↗ Paramedic Treatment of Prolonged Seizures by Intramuscular Versus Intravenous Anticonvulsant Medications Completed Medical University of South Carolina Phase 3 2009-06-01 The goal of this non-inferiority trial is to determine which type of routine care is the best for paramedics to stop someone from seizing.
NCT00809146 ↗ Paramedic Treatment of Prolonged Seizures by Intramuscular Versus Intravenous Anticonvulsant Medications Completed National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) Phase 3 2009-06-01 The goal of this non-inferiority trial is to determine which type of routine care is the best for paramedics to stop someone from seizing.
NCT00809146 ↗ Paramedic Treatment of Prolonged Seizures by Intramuscular Versus Intravenous Anticonvulsant Medications Completed University of California, San Francisco Phase 3 2009-06-01 The goal of this non-inferiority trial is to determine which type of routine care is the best for paramedics to stop someone from seizing.
NCT00809146 ↗ Paramedic Treatment of Prolonged Seizures by Intramuscular Versus Intravenous Anticonvulsant Medications Completed Robert Silbergleit Phase 3 2009-06-01 The goal of this non-inferiority trial is to determine which type of routine care is the best for paramedics to stop someone from seizing.
NCT01432522 ↗ A Study for Absorption of Intranasal Epinephrine Compared to Conventional Intramuscular Epinephrine Completed Mahidol University N/A 2010-07-01 This study is a preliminary report of pharmacokinetic data of epinephrine administered via intranasal route (IN) comparing with intramuscular (IM) route in healthy adult volunteers.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for EPIPEN

Condition Name

Condition Name for EPIPEN
Intervention Trials
Anaphylaxis 5
Allergy 2
Anaphylactic Reaction 2
Status Epilepticus 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 EPIPEN
Intervention Trials
Anaphylaxis 6
Rhinitis 2
Hypersensitivity 2
Rhinitis, Allergic 2
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for EPIPEN

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for EPIPEN
Location Trials
United States 41
Canada 2
Israel 2
Thailand 1
Hungary 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 EPIPEN
Location Trials
Maryland 4
New York 3
Wisconsin 2
Virginia 2
Texas 2
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for EPIPEN

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for EPIPEN
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
PHASE1 4
Phase 4 3
Phase 3 3
[disabled in preview] 5
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for EPIPEN
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 10
RECRUITING 1
Unknown status 1
[disabled in preview] 3
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for EPIPEN

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for EPIPEN
Sponsor Trials
Nasus Pharma 3
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) 2
Novotech (Australia) Pty Limited 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 EPIPEN
Sponsor Trials
Other 12
Industry 12
NIH 3
[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 Projections for EpiPen

Last updated: October 28, 2025

Introduction

The EpiPen, a widely recognized emergency medication for anaphylactic reactions, remains a cornerstone in allergy and emergency medicine. Initially developed by Meridian Medical Technologies (a Pfizer subsidiary), EpiPen delivers epinephrine quickly to counter severe allergic reactions. Its market dynamics, clinical development trajectory, and future outlook are critically intertwined with ongoing regulatory, competitive, and innovation pathways.

This analysis provides an in-depth update on clinical trials, evaluates current market conditions, and projects future trends for EpiPen, offering essential insights for pharmaceutical stakeholders, investors, and healthcare providers.


Clinical Trials Landscape for EpiPen

Current Clinical Trial Status

While EpiPen itself is a generic delivery device for epinephrine and historically did not require new clinical trials, recent developments have prompted investigations into related formulations, delivery modes, and allergy management technologies.

Innovations in Epinephrine Autoinjectors

  • New formulations and devices: Multiple companies are developing second-generation autoinjectors aimed at improving ease of use, dose accuracy, and stability. Notably, Adamis Pharmaceuticals and Genentech are conducting clinical evaluations of alternative delivery devices (Phase II/III), focusing on reducing injection pain and improving portability[1].

  • Alternative administration routes: Trials are underway for intranasal or sublingual epinephrine to enhance patient compliance—though these are at early stages and not directly replacing EpiPen.

EpiPen Competitor Development

  • Innovative formulations: Certain clinical trials are assessing formulations that enable longer shelf life, better thermostability, or reduced injection force. For instance, U.S. Pharmacopeia has standards for epinephrine stability that influence trial designs[2].

Overall, the EpiPen device itself remains largely outside the scope of ongoing clinical trials; instead, focus has shifted to novel autoinjector platforms and alternative therapeutic solutions.


Market Overview and Competitive Dynamics

Historical Market Landscape

EpiPen dominated the allergy emergency market for over two decades, with Pfizer generating approximately $1.2 billion annually pre-2016. However, this monopoly faced major disruption from generic competitors post-2016, following the expiration of Pfizer’s patent.

The key market players include:

  • Mylan (now part of Viatris): The original generic manufacturer, introduced affordable alternatives—EpiPen Jr. and Adrenaclick—that significantly eroded Pfizer’s market share.

  • Teva Pharmaceuticals: Entered with Adrenaclick, though faced legal disputes over patent infringement and marketing strategies.

  • Generic Manufacturers: Several companies now produce epinephrine autoinjectors, intensifying price competition and accessibility.

Market Challenges

  • Pricing and Accessibility: The price of EpiPen soared to over $600 for a two-pack in 2016, leading to public and regulatory scrutiny. Mylan responded by offering rebate programs and a cheaper generic, but overall affordability remained a concern.

  • Regulatory and Legal Actions: Pfizer and Mylan faced lawsuits over patent protections, marketing practices, and price hikes. In 2018, Mylan announced a significant reduction in price, prompting increased market competition.

  • Supply Chain and Manufacturing: The COVID-19 pandemic stressed medical supply chains, impacting availability and prompting calls for stockpiling strategies.

Emerging Market Trends

  • Increased Awareness: Public health campaigns have raised awareness about anaphylaxis, increasing demand for emergency medication.

  • Regulatory Approvals for Alternatives: Agencies such as the FDA approved new autoinjectors with improved features—Auvi-Q (approved in 2015)—which introduced voice-guided administration and compact design, challenging EpiPen’s dominance.

  • Global Expansion: Emerging markets exhibit increasing adoption of autoinjectors, though cost remains a barrier; some manufacturers offer lower-cost devices adapted for these markets.


Future Market Projections

Growth Drivers

  • Rising Prevalence of Allergic Diseases: The WHO reports increasing allergy rates globally, with estimates suggesting that up to 10-30% of the population suffers from some form of allergy[3].

  • Enhanced Emergency Response Protocols: Schools, workplaces, and airlines are adopting stricter allergy management policies, incentivizing wider EpiPen distribution.

  • Regulatory Support and Pricing Reforms: Recent legislation, such as the 2020 US Senate’s proposed measures for critical drug price transparency, aims to improve affordability, potentially expanding the market.

Forecasts and Trends (2023-2030)

  • Market Size: The global epinephrine autoinjector market was valued at approximately USD 1.5 billion in 2022 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of ~8% to reach USD 2.8 billion by 2030[4].

  • Market Share Redistribution: Generic autoinjectors are expected to capture a larger share, driven by pricing pressures and technological innovations.

  • Innovations and New Entrants: The emergence of digital autoinjectors with IoT capabilities—tracking administration history and alerting caregivers—may redefine the market landscape.

  • Geographic Expansion: Asia-Pacific and Latin America are anticipated to witness the fastest growth, driven by increased allergy awareness and healthcare infrastructure improvements.


Strategic Considerations for Stakeholders

  • Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Manufacturers: Investing in next-generation delivery systems and patient-centric designs will be crucial to maintain competitiveness.

  • Regulatory Agencies: Continued oversight on device safety, device interoperability standards, and affordability measures will influence market entries.

  • Healthcare Providers: Emphasizing education on allergy management and ensuring availability of affordable options will mitigate emergency risks.

  • Investors: Opportunities exist in emerging autoinjector technologies, especially those integrating digital health solutions.


Key Takeaways

  • Clinical Trials Focus Shift: While traditional EpiPen formulations are well-established, ongoing trials concentrate on innovative delivery devices, alternative formulations, and precision delivery systems, aiming to improve usability and patient compliance.

  • Market Dynamics Evolve Rapidly: Patent expiries and increased competition have driven prices down, yet the market continues to expand driven by rising allergy prevalence and regulatory efforts to improve access.

  • Future Growth Outlook: The global epinephrine autoinjector market is poised for sustained growth, with technological innovation and expanding global access being key drivers.

  • Innovation as a Competitive Edge: Integration of digital health, safer designs, and cost-effective manufacturing will shape industry leaders and market share.

  • Regulatory and Policy Impacts: Policy reforms focusing on drug pricing transparency and device safety will influence the development and commercialization pathways.


FAQs

1. Are there ongoing clinical trials for new formulations of epinephrine autoinjectors?
Yes. Several companies are evaluating novel formulations and delivery devices aimed at improving ease of use, reducing pain, and enhancing stability, particularly in Phase II and III trials [1].

2. How has market competition affected the pricing of EpiPen?
The entry of generics and competing devices has significantly reduced prices. In 2016, the EpiPen's price surged past $600, but subsequent market pressure resulted in reductions, with some generics available for under $300 [4].

3. What innovations are likely to impact the future of epinephrine autoinjectors?
Digital integration (e.g., dose tracking via smartphone), improved injection mechanisms, and alternative administration routes (intranasal, sublingual) are emerging trends that could transform the market landscape.

4. How does the global allergy prevalence influence the epinephrine autoinjector market?
Rising prevalence globally sustains increased demand, especially in regions with evolving healthcare infrastructure, creating opportunities for market expansion and device accessibility improvements.

5. What role do regulatory agencies play in shaping the future of EpiPen and similar devices?
Regulatory bodies influence market entry, safety standards, pricing transparency, and post-market surveillance, shaping both innovation trajectories and market competitiveness.


References

[1] ClinicalTrials.gov. Search for epinephrine autoinjector trials. (2023).
[2] U.S. Pharmacopeia. Standards for epinephrine stability. (2022).
[3] World Health Organization. The global prevalence of allergic diseases. (2021).
[4] Grand View Research. Epinephrine autoinjector market size and forecast. (2022).

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.