Last Updated: August 3, 2026

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR NIZORAL


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


505(b)(2) Clinical Trials for NIZORAL

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 NCT01110330 ↗ An Efficacy Study of a New Formulation of Ketoconazole 2% Cream in Patients With Tinea Pedis, Commonly Known as Athlete's Foot Terminated Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development, L.L.C. Phase 3 2007-07-01 The purpose of this study is to determine if a new formulation of ketoconazole 2% cream is as effective as a current formulation of ketoconazole 2% cream (Nizoral) compared with placebo in treating patients with Tinea pedis, a skin infection commonly known as "athlete's foot" that is caused by a kind of mold called a fungus.
>Trial Type >Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

All Clinical Trials for NIZORAL

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT00002855 ↗ Chemotherapy Plus Hormone Therapy Versus Androgen Suppression in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Unresectable Prostate Cancer Completed National Cancer Institute (NCI) Phase 3 1996-08-01 RATIONALE: Drugs used in chemotherapy use different ways to stop tumor cells from dividing so they stop growing or die. Combining hormone therapy with chemotherapy and androgen suppression may kill more tumor cells. It is not yet known which treatment regimen is more effective for prostate cancer. PURPOSE: Randomized phase III trial to compare the effectiveness of chemotherapy plus hormone therapy versus androgen suppression alone as initial therapy in patients with prostate cancer that is metastatic or that cannot be removed surgically.
NCT00002855 ↗ Chemotherapy Plus Hormone Therapy Versus Androgen Suppression in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Unresectable Prostate Cancer Completed M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Phase 3 1996-08-01 RATIONALE: Drugs used in chemotherapy use different ways to stop tumor cells from dividing so they stop growing or die. Combining hormone therapy with chemotherapy and androgen suppression may kill more tumor cells. It is not yet known which treatment regimen is more effective for prostate cancer. PURPOSE: Randomized phase III trial to compare the effectiveness of chemotherapy plus hormone therapy versus androgen suppression alone as initial therapy in patients with prostate cancer that is metastatic or that cannot be removed surgically.
NCT00003084 ↗ Combination Chemotherapy With Ketoconazole in Treating Patients With Prostate Cancer Completed National Cancer Institute (NCI) Phase 2 1997-12-01 RATIONALE: Drugs used in chemotherapy use different ways to stop tumor cells from dividing so they stop growing or die. Combining more than one drug may kill more tumor cells. PURPOSE: Randomized phase II trial to study the effectiveness of combination chemotherapy consisting of paclitaxel, etoposide, and estramustine as compared with ketoconazole plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and estramustine in treating patients with prostate cancer.
NCT00003084 ↗ Combination Chemotherapy With Ketoconazole in Treating Patients With Prostate Cancer Completed M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Phase 2 1997-12-01 RATIONALE: Drugs used in chemotherapy use different ways to stop tumor cells from dividing so they stop growing or die. Combining more than one drug may kill more tumor cells. PURPOSE: Randomized phase II trial to study the effectiveness of combination chemotherapy consisting of paclitaxel, etoposide, and estramustine as compared with ketoconazole plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and estramustine in treating patients with prostate cancer.
NCT00006371 ↗ A Phase II Trial of Early Medical Adrenalectomy for "D0.5" Prostate Cancer Terminated Janssen Pharmaceuticals Phase 2 2000-05-01 RATIONALE: Androgens can stimulate the growth of prostate cancer cells. Drugs such as aminoglutethimide or ketoconazole may stop the adrenal glands from producing hormones. Combining hydrocortisone with either aminoglutethimide or ketoconazole may be an effective treatment for prostate cancer. PURPOSE: Phase II trial to study the effectiveness of combining hydrocortisone with either aminoglutethimide or ketoconazole in treating patients who have localized stage IV prostate cancer.
NCT00006371 ↗ A Phase II Trial of Early Medical Adrenalectomy for "D0.5" Prostate Cancer Terminated National Cancer Institute (NCI) Phase 2 2000-05-01 RATIONALE: Androgens can stimulate the growth of prostate cancer cells. Drugs such as aminoglutethimide or ketoconazole may stop the adrenal glands from producing hormones. Combining hydrocortisone with either aminoglutethimide or ketoconazole may be an effective treatment for prostate cancer. PURPOSE: Phase II trial to study the effectiveness of combining hydrocortisone with either aminoglutethimide or ketoconazole in treating patients who have localized stage IV prostate cancer.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for NIZORAL

Condition Name

Condition Name for NIZORAL
Intervention Trials
Prostate Cancer 8
Tinea Pedis 5
Sleep Restriction 2
Type 2 Diabetes 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 NIZORAL
Intervention Trials
Prostatic Neoplasms 11
Tinea Pedis 5
Tinea 5
Carcinoma 2
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for NIZORAL

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for NIZORAL
Location Trials
United States 68
Australia 8
New Zealand 4
Brazil 2
United Kingdom 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 NIZORAL
Location Trials
Texas 9
California 7
Nebraska 4
Florida 4
New York 4
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for NIZORAL

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for NIZORAL
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Phase 4 1
Phase 3 6
Phase 2/Phase 3 1
[disabled in preview] 20
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for NIZORAL
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 15
Terminated 10
Recruiting 5
[disabled in preview] 4
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for NIZORAL

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for NIZORAL
Sponsor Trials
National Cancer Institute (NCI) 7
Biolab Sanus Farmaceutica 3
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center 3
[disabled in preview] 9
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for NIZORAL
Sponsor Trials
Other 35
Industry 17
NIH 7
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Nizoral (ketoconazole) clinical trials update, market analysis, and launch/exclusivity projection

Last updated: July 28, 2026

Nizoral is an established imidazole antifungal brand with limited, aging clinical-trials momentum in recent years and a market defined by generic ketoconazole. Commercial activity is concentrated in dermatology indications (notably dandruff/seborrheic dermatitis and tinea versicolor) using oral and topical formulations. Patent-driven market exclusivity has largely lapsed; growth is now tied to formulation, channel execution, and brand vs. generic pricing rather than new regulatory exclusivity.

What clinical trials have been updated for Nizoral (ketoconazole) in 2023–2026?

Clinical-trials updates for “Nizoral” specifically have largely shifted from brand-labeled studies to generic ketoconazole research and retrospective safety work. The key practical point for R&D planning: the most relevant evidence set for ketoconazole remains historical, with modern activity focused on formulation refinement and safety/regulatory compliance rather than new pivotal efficacy trials.

Which Nizoral indications still attract clinical activity?

Most current clinical and real-world evidence activity around ketoconazole clusters in:

  • Dermatophyte and yeast skin infections
  • Seborrheic dermatitis / dandruff
  • Tinea (including tinea versicolor)
  • Vaginal/oral candidiasis (depending on formulation and country label)
  • Drug safety monitoring for hepatotoxicity and CYP-mediated interactions (particularly for oral ketoconazole)

Oral vs topical ketoconazole: what differs for clinical update cadence?

  • Oral ketoconazole: historical trials exist, but modern updates are typically safety-focused and influenced by major regulatory actions restricting systemic use.
  • Topical ketoconazole: tends to have more ongoing formulation and comparative studies (often with generics), plus local effectiveness and adherence work.

What is the Orange Book status of Nizoral (ketoconazole) and how does exclusivity end?

Orange Book status is a proxy for US listed patents tied to FDA-approved Nizoral products (depending on dosage form and reference listed drug). In practice, ketoconazole brands are mature and most listed patent families have expired or are functionally irrelevant due to generic market entries.

Does Nizoral have active US patent exclusivity blocking generics?

No: Nizoral’s patent exclusivity has largely expired. Market access is generally driven by FDA approvals for abbreviated NDAs and formulation-specific patent remnants that are typically narrow (composition/polymorph/crystallization, method-of-manufacture, or specific dosage form attributes).

What is the practical exclusivity timeline for ketoconazole dermatology?

  • Dermatology indications: most “exclusivity” is now channel-based rather than legal. Expect generics to dominate pricing once any narrow barriers lapse.
  • Systemic ketoconazole: the regulatory environment (label restrictions) reduces the incentive for generic entrants versus topical products, but it does not restore brand exclusivity.

What patents protect ketoconazole/Nizoral formulations, and which expiration dates matter?

For current commercial strategy, the relevant question is not the existence of ketoconazole patents but whether any still-live patents protect:

  • a specific dosage form (shampoo, cream, foam, gel, tablet/capsule)
  • a formulation (polymer system, penetration enhancers, surfactant blends)
  • a manufacturing method
  • a specific use (often narrower in dermatology OTC-like categories)

Patent estate structure for mature ketoconazole brands

Common still-relevant categories (when they exist) are:

  • Formulation composition patents
  • Process/manufacturing patents
  • Analytical methods for QC release (less often blocking)
  • Method-of-use patents in narrowly defined regimens (rarely strong for a mature drug)

In most markets, these families are either expired or close to expiration, and any remaining barriers are usually outweighed by generic reformulation latitude.

What generic entry risks exist for Nizoral (ketoconazole)?

Generic entry risk is typically high because ketoconazole is off-patent and widely manufactured. The risk is highest when:

  • the product is not under tight formulation patent coverage
  • the label is broad and easy to mirror
  • the dosage form has low manufacturing complexity and fewer protected excipients

What barriers can still slow genericization?

  • Remaining dosage-form specific patents (if any still live)
  • Bioequivalence challenges for systemic products (formulation-dependent)
  • Label restrictions reducing generic commercial attractiveness for oral ketoconazole in some jurisdictions

How does Nizoral ketoconazole compare with competing antifungals on efficacy and market positioning?

Competitive landscape (core substitutes)

Ketoconazole faces competition from:

  • Selenium sulfide
  • Ciclopirox (ciclopirox olamine)
  • Zinc pyrithione
  • Terbinafine (more in dermatophyte indications)
  • Azoles with stronger systemic positioning where permitted (e.g., fluconazole, itraconazole depending on region and label)
  • Emerging topical antifungal actives are limited by the OTC/dandruff category dynamics

Market positioning: why ketoconazole still has share

Ketoconazole retains market relevance because:

  • topical actives are entrenched in dermatology routines
  • the safety profile for topical use is well understood
  • supply chains for ketoconazole are established globally

What market size, growth drivers, and price dynamics apply to Nizoral?

Nizoral’s category market behaves like a mature dermatology antifungal segment:

  • growth is modest and comes from unit volume shifts, switching between generics and brands, and distribution expansion
  • pricing declines follow generic penetration cycles
  • premiumization is limited unless formulation convenience or perceived efficacy can justify brand pricing

Key drivers

  1. Chronicity of dandruff/seborrheic dermatitis supports recurring use.
  2. OTC availability patterns in key countries influence brand share and pricing.
  3. Safety and regulatory framing affects oral ketoconazole demand more than topical.

Key headwinds

  • generic substitution
  • regulatory constraints on oral ketoconazole in some jurisdictions (limiting systemic demand)
  • increased use of newer/adjacent OTC antifungals in dandruff management

What regulatory milestones affect Nizoral, especially oral ketoconazole?

The highest regulatory sensitivity for ketoconazole is systemic:

  • major label restrictions in multiple geographies due to hepatotoxicity risk
  • strengthened warnings and prescriber constraints
  • interaction risk driven by CYP metabolism and concomitant therapies

Topical ketoconazole typically faces a lower regulatory burden and remains broadly used in dermatology settings.

FDA pathway implication for new “Nizoral-like” products

Any new ketoconazole product is likely to pursue:

  • generic or 505(b)(2) paths depending on whether reformulation changes warrant clinical bridging
  • safety documentation focused on established active and route-specific risk

What is the most likely 3–5 year market projection for Nizoral ketoconazole?

Projection depends on whether analysis targets:

  • topical brands/products (higher resilience)
  • oral products (more constrained by safety label and lower systemic demand)

Directional forecast (without relying on proprietary unpublished data)

  • Topical Nizoral: low-to-mid single-digit volume growth in mature markets; value growth likely constrained by generic price pressure unless brand retains differentiation through formulation, availability, and channel contracts.
  • Oral Nizoral: flat to declining demand where systemic ketoconazole restrictions limit use; growth is unlikely to be driven by new pivotal indications given the maturity of the evidence base and market normalization to generics.

Revenue exposure: what matters commercially

Commercial value is mostly determined by:

  • brand share vs. private label/generics
  • channel mix (dermatology Rx vs OTC distribution)
  • pack-size and formulation (shampoo/cream/gel)
  • compliance with evolving safety labeling requirements

What launch scenarios are available if a new ketoconazole formulation attempts to compete?

A new entrant would most likely target one of three lanes:

  1. Brand-to-generic switchback using convenience and adherence (e.g., easier foam/gel formats)
  2. Region-specific differentiation where brand positioning persists longer
  3. Combination products (if regulatory-acceptable) to broaden target profile

However, for Nizoral-like ketoconazole, legal/market structure means that “newness” is mostly formulation-level, not protected clinical exclusivity.

What litigation or settlement dynamics typically affect ketoconazole brands?

For mature products, litigation usually concentrates on:

  • generic approval challenges and Orange Book patent disputes
  • narrow formulation or method-of-manufacture claims

In practice, the litigation surface for ketoconazole is smaller than for newer biologics and patented small molecules because the base active is long out of patent and most disputes center on remaining formulation patents, if any.

Key Takeaways

  • Nizoral (ketoconazole) is a mature antifungal with limited recent “brand-specific” pivotal clinical activity; current evidence momentum is safety- and formulation-oriented.
  • Patent/exclusivity barriers are largely exhausted; market access is dominated by generic ketoconazole and pricing dynamics.
  • The best commercial resilience is typically in topical dermatology (dandruff/seborrheic dermatitis), while oral ketoconazole is constrained by safety label restrictions.
  • A credible 3–5 year projection points to modest volume growth and limited value growth for topical brands unless differentiated by formulation/channel.

FAQs

  1. Why did oral ketoconazole demand shrink in many markets?
  2. Do topical ketoconazole products have different patent and generic-entry risk than oral ketoconazole?
  3. How do OTC dandruff category substitutes (selenium sulfide, zinc pyrithione, ciclopirox) affect ketoconazole brand share?
  4. What FDA review pathway would a new ketoconazole formulation most likely use?
  5. Which ketoconazole safety issues drive clinician and payer restrictions?

References

  1. FDA Drug Safety Communications. (n.d.). FDA safety communications on ketoconazole restrictions and warnings. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
  2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Drugs@FDA database entries for ketoconazole products and labeling history. FDA.
  3. FDA. (n.d.). Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations. FDA.

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.