CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR LOSARTAN POTASSIUM

All Clinical Trials for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM

Trial ID	Title	Status	Sponsor	Phase	Start Date	Summary
NCT00090259 ↗	Study to Evaluate Potential Decrease in Hospitalization Events, Time Between Events, and Increasing Longevity in Patients With Symptomatic Heart Failure (0954-948)	Completed	Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.	Phase 3	2001-12-19	This is a multicenter study to evaluate potential decrease in hospitalization events and time between events and increasing longevity in patients with symptomatic congestive heart failure and intolerant of first-line medication for heart failure. This study will evaluate if higher doses of the investigational drug given daily will be superior to the lower dose of the same investigational drug given daily.
NCT00140907 ↗	ALLOGRAFT, A Study to Evaluate the Renal Protective Effects of Losartan (0954-222)(COMPLETED)	Completed	Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.	Phase 4	2000-03-14	To demonstrate that losartan (+ conventional therapy) compared to placebo (+ conventional therapy) will reduce the number of RT patients who experience histological lesions of chronic allograft nephropathy
NCT00140985 ↗	Antiproteinuric Efficacy of Losartan Potassium in Patients With Non-Diabetic Proteinuric Renal Diseases (0954-213)	Completed	Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.	Phase 4	2000-02-01	Antiproteinuric Efficacy of Losartan Potassium in Patients with Non-Diabetic Proteinuric Renal Diseases.
NCT00157963 ↗	Hydrochlorothiazide (+) Losartan Potassium vs. Amlodipine Comparative Study (0954A-314)	Completed	Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.	Phase 4	2005-02-05	An efficacy and safety study of hydrochlorothiazide (+) losartan potassium compared to amlodipine at week 12 in Korean patients with essential hypertension
NCT00185094 ↗	A Comparison of the Effect of Olmesartan Medoxomil, Losartan Potassium, and Atenolol on the Ability of Overweight Patients With High Blood Pressure to Respond to Insulin	Completed	Daiichi Sankyo Inc.	Phase 4	2004-02-01	To examine the effect of three different blood pressure medications on the insulin sensitivity in overweight patients with high blood pressure.
NCT00185094 ↗	A Comparison of the Effect of Olmesartan Medoxomil, Losartan Potassium, and Atenolol on the Ability of Overweight Patients With High Blood Pressure to Respond to Insulin	Completed	Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.	Phase 4	2004-02-01	To examine the effect of three different blood pressure medications on the insulin sensitivity in overweight patients with high blood pressure.
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.

Clinical Trial Conditions for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM

Condition Name

Condition Name for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Intervention	Trials
Hypertension	34
Healthy	8
Essential Hypertension	4
Kidney Disease	3

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Intervention	Trials
Hypertension	37
Essential Hypertension	8
Kidney Diseases	8
Fibrosis	4

Clinical Trial Locations for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Location	Trials
United States	117
China	24
India	4
Brazil	3
Italy	3

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Location	Trials
California	11
Texas	10
Ohio	7
North Carolina	5
New York	5

Clinical Trial Progress for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
PHASE4	1
Phase 4	18
Phase 3	18

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
Completed	59
Recruiting	10
Terminated	7

Clinical Trial Sponsors for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Sponsor	Trials
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.	21
Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.	4
University of Oxford	4

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for LOSARTAN POTASSIUM
Sponsor	Trials
Other	59
Industry	49
NIH	11

LOSARTAN POTASSIUM Market Analysis and Financial Projection

Last updated: April 27, 2026

Losartan Potassium: Clinical Trial Update, Market Analysis, and Projection

What is the current clinical trial landscape for losartan potassium?

Losartan potassium (class: angiotensin II receptor blockers, ARBs) is an established marketed therapy with a mature clinical evidence base. Public registries show limited new late-stage development for “losartan potassium” itself, because the core molecule is already in routine use and most recent activity clusters around:

• new formulations and fixed-dose combinations (FDCs)
• bioequivalence (BE) and post-approval studies tied to generics and line extensions
• comparative or population-specific studies that typically do not target first-in-class indications

Practical read-through for R&D and investment: near-term “clinical trial update” value for losartan is more about regulatory and lifecycle activity (BE, formulation, pediatric or adherence endpoints) than about new therapeutic claims.

Evidence base: outcomes anchored to major historic trials

Across the ARB class, losartan’s clinical foundation is tied to large outcomes programs including:

• LIFE (Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension): demonstrated cardiovascular risk reduction versus atenolol in hypertensive patients with LVH
• RENAAL (Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan): kidney outcome benefits in type 2 diabetes with nephropathy
• HEAAL (Heart failure endpoint evaluation of angiotensin II antagonism with losartan): dose-optimization outcomes in heart failure

These programs shape label structure for ongoing use, but they are not “new trials” in the sense of fresh phase-3 claims. They are the anchor data that new competitors must either replicate for differentiation or bypass through line extensions.

Source anchoring: key trials are described in the original publications and major reference summaries [1–3].

---

What is the market size and demand profile for losartan potassium?

Losartan is a high-volume generic ARB with intense price competition, supported by:

• broad hypertension diagnosis funnel
• guideline placement for patients intolerant to ACE inhibitors
• widespread use in diabetic kidney disease risk management and heart failure programs (as supported by label history and guideline practice)

Market structure (how it monetizes):

• Revenue concentrates in hypertension and chronic kidney disease cohorts
• Margin compression is typical due to generic penetration and low switching costs within the ARB class
• Volume stability is driven by chronic, long duration of therapy and payer formularies

Competitive positioning inside ARBs

Losartan competes on:

• class interchangeability versus other ARBs (valsartan, irbesartan, telmisartan, olmesartan)
• payer preference and price
• fixed-dose and combination offerings (losartan + hydrochlorothiazide is common)

Because losartan is an older molecule, brand-level differentiation is limited. The practical levers are product form (tabs, combos), availability, and procurement pricing.

---

What do recent regulatory and lifecycle patterns suggest for near-term clinical activity?

For established generics, “clinical updates” typically mean:

• BE studies to support generic entry or manufacturing changes
• pediatric/label stewardship studies in line with regulatory requirements
• formulation changes (e.g., FDCs) that may require bridging or BE

This dynamic produces continuous registry activity, but it does not translate into a new mechanism of action or materially new clinical claims. For business planning, the value comes from tracking:

• new generic launches by country and label packaging
• FDC approvals that can capture formulary attention
• periodic shifts in procurement pricing that move share within ARB classes

---

How strong is the pipeline signal for “new indications” versus lifecycle studies?

For an established ARB with broad generic coverage, the signal for true “new indication” phase 2/3 is usually low. The competitive pipeline is more frequently:

• incremental (BE, FDC)
• comparative (head-to-head tolerability and adherence proxies)
• registry studies

What this means for projections: volume is likely to remain stable, with revenue growth driven mainly by pricing stability, mix shift into FDCs, and country-level formulary behavior rather than by new clinical endpoints.

---

Market Analysis and Projection

Where does pricing pressure come from, and what offsets it?

Pricing pressure:

• generics and multiple suppliers
• ARB class substitution with similar efficacy profiles
• procurement-driven pricing

Offsets:

• persistent chronic demand from hypertension prevalence
• combination products that improve convenience and adherence
• continued inclusion in clinical pathways as first-line or ARB alternative

---

Revenue outlook (directional projection)

Directional view: losartan potassium market revenue is expected to grow low-to-mid single digits in most mature markets, with:

• flat or modest unit growth driven by population and diagnosis rates
• revenue changes driven more by price and mix than by net new treated patients

Key driver hierarchy for 2025–2030:

1. payer substitution and procurement pricing (dominant)
2. share of fixed-dose combinations (mix)
3. country-specific hypertension screening and control programs (volume)

---

What is the forecast under different macro scenarios?

Given generic saturation, the “range” is primarily price-led rather than indication-led.

Scenario A: Stable procurement pricing and steady FDC mix

• Units: steady to slight growth
• Revenue: low growth
• Competitive intensity: continues, limited differentiation

Scenario B: Accelerating price competition (new entries or tender resets)

• Units: may remain stable, but revenue declines or grows very slowly
• Margin: compresses across generic suppliers
• Likely winners: scale producers and efficient supply chains

Scenario C: Mix shift into combination products and slightly better pricing discipline

• Units: steady
• Revenue: modest improvement versus Scenario B
• Winners: companies with strong FDC portfolios and distribution

---

What should investors and R&D planners track next?

Use these as leading indicators:

• FDC approvals and launches that include losartan (especially with diuretic partners)
• BE and formulation lifecycle changes that signal manufacturing momentum
• country-level tender pricing behavior for ARBs
• guideline revisions that alter preferred ARB selection within class (rare but can matter)

---

Key Takeaways

• Losartan potassium’s clinical “update” trend is dominated by lifecycle and regulatory studies (BE and FDC support), not new late-stage outcomes.
• Market demand stays anchored to chronic hypertension and comorbidity management, but revenue growth is constrained by generic competition and class substitution.
• 2025–2030 revenue performance is primarily price-and-mix driven, with the strongest offset coming from fixed-dose combination uptake.

---

FAQs

1) Is losartan potassium still being studied in phase 3 trials for new indications?

The active signal for “losartan potassium” is more consistent with lifecycle studies than with new phase 3 indication expansions. The historic outcomes programs remain the basis for clinical positioning [1–3].

2) What endpoints matter most for market differentiation in an ARB like losartan?

For an established generic molecule, differentiation tends to come from formulation performance (BE, tolerability proxies, adherence outcomes) and from combination-product convenience rather than new efficacy claims.

3) How does fixed-dose combination use change the economics for losartan?

FDCs can improve adherence and formularies can favor them, which can lift share and stabilize pricing versus single-ingredient products subject to higher substitution.

4) What clinical trials are most cited for losartan’s outcomes profile?

LIFE (hypertension with LVH), RENAAL (diabetic nephropathy), and HEAAL (heart failure dose evaluation) are central outcomes references shaping label-era confidence [1–3].

5) What is the main risk to revenue projections for losartan potassium?

Price resets and intensified generic procurement within the ARB class, which can outpace any unit growth.

---

References

[1] Dahlöf B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction (LIFE) study: a randomised trial against atenolol. The Lancet. 2002.
[2] Brenner BM, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, et al. Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy: the RENAAL study. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2001.
[3] Schrier RW, Ghali JK, Pitt B, et al. Effects of losartan to reduce endpoints in elderly patients with heart failure: the HEAAL study. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2009.