CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR GLATIRAMER ACETATE

505(b)(2) Clinical Trials for GLATIRAMER ACETATE

This table shows clinical trials for potential 505(b)(2) applications. See the next table for all clinical trials

Trial Type	Trial ID	Title	Status	Sponsor	Phase	Start Date	Summary
New Formulation	NCT01578785 ↗	An Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability Study of Glatiramer Acetate (GA) 20 mg/0.5 ml New Formulation Administered Daily by Subcutaneous (SC) Injection in Subjects With Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS)	Terminated	Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc.	Phase 3	2012-03-01	This study will investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of a new formulation of glatiramer acetate administered at 20 mg/0.5 ml daily versus placebo in patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS).
New Formulation	NCT01578785 ↗	An Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability Study of Glatiramer Acetate (GA) 20 mg/0.5 ml New Formulation Administered Daily by Subcutaneous (SC) Injection in Subjects With Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS)	Terminated	Teva Pharmaceutical Industries	Phase 3	2012-03-01	This study will investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of a new formulation of glatiramer acetate administered at 20 mg/0.5 ml daily versus placebo in patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS).

All Clinical Trials for GLATIRAMER ACETATE

Trial ID	Title	Status	Sponsor	Phase	Start Date	Summary
NCT00039988 ↗	Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis With Copaxone and Albuterol	Completed	Autoimmunity Centers of Excellence	N/A	2001-11-01	The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) alone compared to Copaxone plus albuterol in patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). MS is thought to be an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system. Certain white blood cells of the immune system become abnormally active and mistakenly attack the myelin of nerve fibers. Myelin is a fatty sheath that surrounds nerve fibers and insulates the nerve like insulation around an electrical wire. Without proper myelin insulation, messages sent between the brain and other parts of the body may be confused or fail completely. Damage to myelin causes the symptoms of MS. The most common form of MS is known as relapsing-remitting (RR), where partial or total recovery occurs after attacks. Four therapies are currently approved for the treatment of MS. These therapies, however, are only moderately effective and can cause undesirable side effects. For this reason, there is a need to find new therapies that have minimal side effects and may stop the disease from getting worse.
NCT00039988 ↗	Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis With Copaxone and Albuterol	Completed	National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)	N/A	2001-11-01	The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) alone compared to Copaxone plus albuterol in patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). MS is thought to be an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system. Certain white blood cells of the immune system become abnormally active and mistakenly attack the myelin of nerve fibers. Myelin is a fatty sheath that surrounds nerve fibers and insulates the nerve like insulation around an electrical wire. Without proper myelin insulation, messages sent between the brain and other parts of the body may be confused or fail completely. Damage to myelin causes the symptoms of MS. The most common form of MS is known as relapsing-remitting (RR), where partial or total recovery occurs after attacks. Four therapies are currently approved for the treatment of MS. These therapies, however, are only moderately effective and can cause undesirable side effects. For this reason, there is a need to find new therapies that have minimal side effects and may stop the disease from getting worse.
NCT00071838 ↗	Zenapax (Daclizumab) to Treat Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis	Completed	National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)	Phase 2	2003-10-30	This study will examine the safety of Zenapax (daclizumab) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). MS is thought to be caused by an over-reactive immune response. T-lymphocytes (cells of the immune system), are thought to damage myelin, a substance that covers the nerve and parts of the spinal cord and is damaged in patients with MS. Interleukin-2 is a natural substance in the body that is necessary for the growth of T-lymphocytes. Zenapax is a genetically engineered antibody that blocks the activity of interleukin-2 and thus interferes with the growth of lymphocytes. Therefore, Zenapax may prevent some of the damage to myelin that occurs in multiple sclerosis. Patients between 18 and 65 years of age with relapsing remitting MS may be eligible for this study. Patients with secondary-progressive or primary progressive MS may not participate. Candidates will be screened with a complete neurological and medical evaluation and review of medical records. Participants will undergo the following tests and procedures: - Baseline evaluation: Participants have four magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans over a 3-month period to assess disease activity. For the MRI scans, the patient lies on a table that slides into the scanner - a narrow metal cylinder with a strong magnetic field. Scanning time varies from 20 minutes to 3 hours, with most scans lasting between 45 and 90 minutes. Only patients with activity at or above a certain level are eligible to continue with the treatment phase of the study. - Zenapax treatment: Patients receive intravenous (through a vein) infusions of Zenapax. The first two infusions are 2 weeks apart, followed by 13 monthly infusions. - MRI scans: Patients undergo MRI scanning before every infusion to evaluate disease activity and identify new brain lesions. - Blood and urine tests: Blood and urine samples are collected at each clinic visit for routine laboratory evaluations, immunologic study, and genetic testing to determine a predisposition for responding to Zenapax treatment. - Lumbar puncture (spinal tap): This procedure will be done during the last month before starting treatment and during the seventh month of treatment to examine immune changes that occur in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), which circulates through and surrounds the brain and spinal cord. A local anesthetic is given and a needle is inserted in the space between the bones in the lower back where the CSF circulates below the spinal cord. A small amount of fluid is collected through the needle. - Skin test: A needle is placed just under the skin is done to assess the patient's immune status to common antigens such as tetanus, mumps and candida. - Lymphocytopheresis: Lymphocytes are collected three times - once during the last month of baseline before starting treatment, once during the fifth month of treatment, and once during the last month of treatment - for immunologic study. Blood is collected through a needle in an arm vein in a similar way to donating blood. The blood flows from the vein through a catheter (plastic tube) into a machine that separates it into its components by centrifugation (spinning). The lymphocytes are removed and the rest of the blood (red cells, plasma and platelets) is returned to the body, either through the same needle or through another needle in the other arm.
NCT00078338 ↗	Rebif® Versus Copaxone® in the Treatment of Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis	Completed	Pfizer	Phase 4	2004-02-16	The primary objective of the study is to assess the clinical efficacy of Rebif® 44 microgram (mcg) three times per week compared with Copaxone® 20 milligram (mg) daily in subjects with relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.

Clinical Trial Conditions for GLATIRAMER ACETATE

Condition Name

Condition Name for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Intervention	Trials
Multiple Sclerosis	28
Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis	15
Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis	13
Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting	9

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Intervention	Trials
Multiple Sclerosis	71
Sclerosis	68
Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting	47
Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive	4

Clinical Trial Locations for GLATIRAMER ACETATE

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Location	Trials
United States	424
Canada	33
Germany	33
Spain	30
Brazil	16

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Location	Trials
California	22
New York	20
Ohio	19
Illinois	17
Florida	17

Clinical Trial Progress for GLATIRAMER ACETATE

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
Phase 4	17
Phase 3	21
Phase 2/Phase 3	2

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
Completed	48
Terminated	10
Unknown status	6

Clinical Trial Sponsors for GLATIRAMER ACETATE

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Sponsor	Trials
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries	19
Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc.	16
Biogen	9

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for GLATIRAMER ACETATE
Sponsor	Trials
Other	87
Industry	79
NIH	8

Glatiramer Acetate: Clinical-Trials Update, Market Analysis, and 2026-2035 Projection

Last updated: April 27, 2026

What is glatiramer acetate’s current clinical-trial and regulatory status?

Glatiramer acetate (GA) is an established disease-modifying therapy (DMT) for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS). The clinical-trial landscape is dominated by long-running comparative effectiveness, real-world evidence (RWE) studies, label- and formulation-focused work, and expanding use in combination or switching contexts. Public registries show a continuing pipeline, but no consistent signal of late-stage, brand-defining phase 3 programs that would materially reset competitive positioning in the way seen with high-profile novel oral or antibody therapies.

How GA’s clinical activity typically shows up in registries

• RWE and comparative studies: outcomes in routine care versus other DMTs.
• Safety and tolerability: injection-site reactions, adherence, pregnancy-related registry data (where tracked), and comorbidity sub-analyses.
• Switching studies: migration to or from GA in treatment sequences.
• Utilization and health economics: adherence, persistence, and resource use.

Trial intensity trend (high-level)

• GA’s profile is consistent with a mature product class: activity is steady but smaller in scale than late-stage development for new MOAs.
• The largest near-term competitive pressure to GA is pricing and channel access rather than a single missing clinical endpoint.

Regulatory anchors that keep GA clinically “stable”

• GA has a long record in RMS indications and retains market relevance where payer policies favor injectable DMTs.
• The regulatory strategy for mature injectables typically emphasizes confirmatory safety and real-world label consistency rather than new pivotal efficacy.

What does the competitive market landscape look like for glatiramer acetate?

GA competes in RMS against:

• High-efficacy orals (BTK and S1P-pathway competitors dominate formularies in many markets)
• Injectable monoclonals and newer biologics
• Older injectables (interferon beta products and other generics/biosimilars depending on the geography)

Competitive dynamics by channel

1) Formularies and payer design

• GA benefits from cost-positioning relative to newer oral and biologic DMTs in many markets.
• Where step-therapy or prior authorization is strict, GA can be used as a “lower-cost entry” DMT before escalation.

2) Adherence and patient preferences

• GA requires regular injection, which can reduce persistence versus oral options.
• Patient selection matters: GA retains demand in segments that prioritize long safety history and established tolerability.

3) Generic and long-tail competition

• Mature injectables face price erosion over time from generics and brand challengers.
• Margin structure shifts toward distribution efficiency, contracting leverage, and pharmacovigilance execution.

Evidence-based positioning (what payers can point to)

GA’s market role is strongest where payers and clinicians value:

• long safety record
• predictable risk profile
• use in earlier lines or where high-efficacy agents are restricted by rules, risk scoring, or budget impact thresholds

How large is the glatiramer acetate market, and what does the 2026-2035 projection imply?

A complete forecast requires access to specific geography and revenue definitions (brand vs total product including authorized generics, and whether the market is measured in units, prescriptions, or manufacturer sales). This response provides an investment-ready directional projection framework using industry-standard forecast drivers for RMS DMTs:

Core forecast drivers for GA

1. Volume pressure from oral DMTs
   RMS patients increasingly start on oral therapies where access allows.
2. Switching behavior
   GA faces outflows to higher-efficacy options after breakthrough disease activity.
3. Payer cost controls and step therapy
   GA can gain share through lower net cost and managed-entry rules.
4. Persistence and treatment duration
   Injectables often keep a base of persistent users even if new starts slow.
5. Generic competition effects
   Revenue per patient trends downward as competition intensifies.

Market projection: scenario range (directional)

2026-2035 base case (directional)

• Global GA revenue: gradual decline in nominal terms driven by share shift to orals and ongoing price compression.
• Unit volume: likely steadier than revenue due to mix shifting toward lower-priced products.
• Net effect: GA remains relevant in controlled-access markets and in step-therapy entry lines.

2026-2035 bull case (directional)

• GA stabilizes or modestly increases unit share where:
  • payers widen coverage for lower-cost DMTs
  • high-efficacy access restrictions persist
  • oral uptake slows due to budget constraints or safety-driven selection

2026-2035 bear case (directional)

• GA share declines faster if:
  • payers reclassify GA downward in treatment pathways
  • oral uptake continues in newly eligible RMS populations
  • generics accelerate price erosion without offsetting volume

Practical investment implications

• For R&D planning: GA’s near-term value is less about new mechanism differentiation and more about formulation lifecycle management, contracting, and patient retention strategies.
• For investors: GA behaves like a mature branded-generic category with declining margins and stable clinical utility, unless a regulatory or payer pivot creates a step-up demand rebound.

What are the key near-term risks and opportunities?

Risks

• Formulary substitution toward orals and higher-efficacy injectables
• Net price compression from authorized and non-authorized competition
• Adherence disadvantage versus oral DMTs
• Margin sensitivity to distributor rebates and contracting terms

Opportunities

• Payer strategy alignment: GA as controlled-access entry or post-intolerance option
• Real-world outcomes storytelling: persistence, switching patterns, discontinuation drivers
• Patient segmentation: use in patients prioritizing established safety and predictable tolerability
• Market-specific contracting: performance-based and indication-steered access

What is the R&D and pipeline shape going forward for glatiramer acetate?

For mature DMTs like GA, the “pipeline” typically includes:

• head-to-head or comparative effectiveness studies in routine care settings
• long-term safety follow-ups and registry analysis
• studies focused on special populations or treatment sequences
• health economics and outcomes research supporting formulary access

What this means for competitive positioning

• New trial results rarely overturn GA’s positioning on efficacy, because the mechanism is known and historical evidence is entrenched.
• The battleground is coverage and cost-of-therapy, supported by pragmatic evidence.

Key takeaways

• Glatiramer acetate remains a mature RMS DMT with continuing clinical activity concentrated in real-world, sequencing, and safety/optimization studies rather than late-stage paradigm shifts.
• Market share and revenue direction are primarily driven by payer access design, oral DMT substitution, and ongoing price pressure from competition.
• A 2026-2035 outlook is most consistent with gradual nominal revenue decline and relative stabilization of utilization where step therapy favors lower-cost injectables.
• Competitive differentiation for GA increasingly depends on contracting execution and evidence supporting persistence and switching patterns, not on new mechanism breakthroughs.

FAQs

1) Why does glatiramer acetate keep a role despite oral DMT growth?
Because payers and clinicians often use GA in step-therapy pathways, cost-controlled formularies, and patients who prefer or require injectables with a long safety history.

2) Does the clinical-trial update for glatiramer acetate signal a major efficacy breakthrough?
No consistent pattern indicates a late-stage, brand-defining efficacy reset. Trial activity is typically steady but aligned to pragmatic evidence generation for a mature product.

3) What most affects GA revenue over 2026-2035?
Net price and formulary placement. Even with stable persistence, revenue can decline as oral substitution and competitive pricing expand.

4) How does generic competition change the outlook?
It compresses revenue per patient and increases the importance of channel contracting, distribution efficiency, and evidence packages tied to coverage decisions.

5) What market segments are most resilient for GA?
Markets and payer plans that prioritize lower-cost entry DMTs, and patient groups where injection-based therapy is preferred or access to higher-cost/high-efficacy agents is restricted.

---

References

[1] U.S. National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov. Glatiramer acetate search results (accessed 2026-04-27).
[2] European Medicines Agency (EMA). Copaxone product information and assessment history (accessed 2026-04-27).
[3] FDA. Copaxone (glatiramer acetate) prescribing information and label history (accessed 2026-04-27).