Last Updated: June 25, 2026

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR WESTCORT


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


All Clinical Trials for WESTCORT

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT00186628 ↗ Phase 2 Trial of Prophylactic Rituximab Therapy for Prevention of CGVHD Completed National Cancer Institute (NCI) Phase 2 2005-06-01 To determine if rituximab administered after allogeneic transplantation decreases the incidence of chronic graft-vs-host disease (cGvHD)
NCT00186628 ↗ Phase 2 Trial of Prophylactic Rituximab Therapy for Prevention of CGVHD Completed The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Phase 2 2005-06-01 To determine if rituximab administered after allogeneic transplantation decreases the incidence of chronic graft-vs-host disease (cGvHD)
NCT00186628 ↗ Phase 2 Trial of Prophylactic Rituximab Therapy for Prevention of CGVHD Completed Stanford University Phase 2 2005-06-01 To determine if rituximab administered after allogeneic transplantation decreases the incidence of chronic graft-vs-host disease (cGvHD)
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for WESTCORT

Condition Name

Condition Name for WESTCORT
Intervention Trials
Leukemia, Mast-Cell 1
Mantle-cell Lymphoma 1
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for WESTCORT
Intervention Trials
Lymphoma, Mantle-Cell 1
Leukemia, Mast-Cell 1
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for WESTCORT

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for WESTCORT
Location Trials
United States 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 WESTCORT
Location Trials
California 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for WESTCORT

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for WESTCORT
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Phase 2 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for WESTCORT
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for WESTCORT

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for WESTCORT
Sponsor Trials
National Cancer Institute (NCI) 1
The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society 1
Stanford University 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for WESTCORT
Sponsor Trials
Other 2
NIH 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial
Last updated: May 16, 2026

WESTCORT (hydrocortisone valerate) clinical trials update, market analysis, and exclusivity outlook

WESTCORT (hydrocortisone valerate) is an established, locally acting topical corticosteroid indicated for inflammatory and pruritic manifestations responsive to corticosteroids. Because it is an older small-molecule dermatology product with broad generic entry, business-relevant market and exclusivity analysis centers on (1) current FDA listing status, (2) competitive genericization across the same strengths and dosage forms, and (3) whether any remaining formulation, method-of-use, or skin-applied delivery patents extend exclusivity in the US or other major markets.

What clinical trials has WESTCORT (hydrocortisone valerate) completed or is it still recruiting?

Featured snippet answer: Publicly visible trial activity for WESTCORT as a brand is limited. Current clinical development for hydrocortisone valerate in topical steroid classes is usually generic bioequivalence and/or formulation optimization rather than new, brand-labeled Phase 2 to Phase 3 programs.

What trial types matter for a topical steroid brand today?

For mature topical corticosteroids like hydrocortisone valerate, the most decision-relevant “clinical trial updates” typically show up as:

  • Bioequivalence studies for AB-rated generics and authorized follow-on products (often under abbreviated endpoints such as systemic exposure).
  • Formulation and vehicle comparison studies (ointment/cream, concentration, penetration-enhancing excipients).
  • Safety surveillance and label refinement studies, usually not brand-specific.

What endpoints are commonly used for topical steroid development?

  • Local tolerability and irritation scoring at application sites
  • Systemic exposure markers when relevant (serum cortisol suppression monitoring for higher potency or larger-area use)
  • Dermatologic lesion score changes for inflammatory dermatoses used in the label

Why trial visibility for WESTCORT specifically is low

In branded dermatology steroid products with long market histories, development shifts away from large brand-sponsored studies toward:

  • Competitive product equivalence submissions
  • Manufacturing/vehicle optimization
  • Postmarketing pharmacovigilance rather than new efficacy RCTs

What is the FDA regulatory status of WESTCORT, and what is its Orange Book status?

Featured snippet answer: WESTCORT is marketed as hydrocortisone valerate topical corticosteroid. Its US regulatory landscape is governed by the Orange Book listing for any listed patents (active ingredient-related and listed formulation/indication-related patents) tied to the NDA/ANDA. The competitive reality is that multiple generic products typically exist for the same active and dosage form.

How to interpret Orange Book for topical steroid brands

For a product like WESTCORT, Orange Book listings typically fall into these buckets:

  • Drug substance and drug product patents covering the active ingredient and composition
  • Formulation patents (vehicle, emulsifier system, preservatives, concentration-specific composition)
  • Method-of-use patents tied to the labeled indication(s) and dosing regimen
  • Or no meaningful remaining listings if the brand’s patent estate has expired

What this means for market entry risk

If the Orange Book shows no unexpired patents or only weak/near-expiry listings, the practical entry window for additional generics becomes less about new litigation and more about:

  • Patent expiry timing
  • Bioequivalence and CMC readiness
  • Competitive pricing

What patents protect WESTCORT (hydrocortisone valerate) and how strong is the patent estate?

Featured snippet answer: WESTCORT’s patent estate is likely heavily expired or near-expired in the US given the long market history of hydrocortisone valerate topical formulations. Any residual protections tend to be narrow formulation or process claims that do not block AB generics unless the generic falls within the claim scope.

What patent categories would be most relevant to entry?

  • Composition-of-matter claims for a specific hydrocortisone valerate formulation
  • Vehicle and preservative system claims unique to the brand product
  • Process claims specific to manufacturing or particle/particle-size control (more common when there are technical differentiators)

How to assess “strength” in a mature topical steroid

For a topical steroid with many generic competitors, strength depends on:

  • Claim scope clarity relative to typical generic formulations
  • Whether any unexpired patents are listed for the exact dosage form and strength
  • Litigation posture in prior challenges against similar hydrocortisone valerate products

When does WESTCORT lose exclusivity and what generic entry risks exist?

Featured snippet answer: Generic entry risk is high once any remaining listed exclusivities or patents expire. For mature hydrocortisone valerate brands, the dominant risk factor for additional competitors is not patent life but market saturation and contract/payer dynamics.

Exclusivity mechanisms that still matter (if present)

If the brand had any qualifying exclusivity (rare for very old dermatology brands), it would be:

  • Patent-related exclusivity under 35 USC 271(e)(2)
  • Regulatory exclusivity linked to NDA approvals (rare for older established steroids)
  • Any unexpired pediatric or other statutory exclusivity events (usually not applicable here)

What to expect in practice

  • If Orange Book is effectively clear: rapid continued genericization
  • If late-listed formulation patents exist: potential for narrow Paragraph IV disputes, but limited differentiation
  • Regardless of patents: pricing pressure dominates due to class substitution

Which companies sell hydrocortisone valerate topical products that compete with WESTCORT?

Featured snippet answer: The competitive field for hydrocortisone valerate topical products is dominated by generic manufacturers across standard dosage forms (typically creams and ointments), competing primarily through price, supply reliability, and payer formularies rather than clinical differentiation.

How competitors typically position vs WESTCORT

  • AB-rated generics with interchangeable active/strength
  • Store brand and wholesaler-branded products
  • Contract manufacturing supplying large pharmacy chains

What matters for market share

For topical corticosteroids, share shifts most often track:

  • Ingredient acquisition and reimbursement
  • Pharmacy stocking incentives
  • Pharmacy benefit manager step edits (often generic-preferred)

What is the market size and revenue projection for WESTCORT and hydrocortisone valerate topical steroids?

Featured snippet answer: WESTCORT-specific revenue is usually a declining or low single-digit contributor in the hydrocortisone valerate topical category once generics are established. Forward projections typically show flat-to-declining brand revenue, with category volume stable to modestly growing while unit prices trend down.

How to model projections for a mature topical steroid

A realistic projection framework uses:

  • Category demand growth (population, chronic dermatosis prevalence)
  • Pricing curve (generic price erosion)
  • Share shift to cheapest available formulary option
  • Formulary and rebate dynamics

What drives pricing and volume for topical corticosteroids

  • Generic price pressure and parallel substitution
  • Shifts toward certain dosage forms (cream vs ointment) depending on reimbursement
  • Safety and tolerability perceptions impacting adherence

How does WESTCORT compare with other topical corticosteroids (potency, differentiation, and payer preference)?

Featured snippet answer: Hydrocortisone valerate sits in a mid-potency topical corticosteroid tier relative to higher-potency agents. Differentiation is usually limited because payer coverage often prefers AB-equivalent generics.

Where hydrocortisone valerate typically fits

  • Mid-potency topical steroid selection for inflammatory and pruritic dermatoses responsive to corticosteroids
  • Often used when higher potency agents are unnecessary or reserved due to side-effect risk

Competitive landscape logic

In mature topical steroid classes, prescribers choose largely based on:

  • Potency class
  • Vehicle preference (cream for lighter, ointment for occlusion)
  • Cost and formulary access

What formulation patents protect hydrocortisone valerate topical creams or ointments?

Featured snippet answer: Formulation patents, when they exist, are usually vehicle-specific: emulsifier and humectant systems, preservative selection, and concentration-specific compositions that impact stability and skin feel. For entry, the practical risk is whether a generic product literally practices a claim or falls outside the exact vehicle or process limitations.

What generic developers usually change

  • Emulsifier/humectant ratio
  • Preservative system
  • Manufacturing process and viscosity targets

Why formulation protection often fails to block generics

Generic development typically stays within:

  • Bioequivalence expectations
  • Standard pharmacopeial stability targets
  • Non-infringing vehicle variants that avoid specific claim limitations

What patent litigation affects hydrocortisone valerate topical products?

Featured snippet answer: For older, widely genericized topical corticosteroids, litigation is typically sporadic and often limited to narrow formulation or process disputes tied to specific dosage forms and strengths. The broader effect is mostly procedural: delayed entry for a specific ANDA rather than sustained brand exclusivity.

What to look for in litigation records (business relevance)

  • Paragraph IV filings for hydrocortisone valerate creams/ointments
  • Settlement agreements tied to specific ANDA numbers
  • Scope limits that preserve one or more strengths or forms while not protecting the entire category

Key Takeaways

  • WESTCORT’s clinical development as a brand is unlikely to show active late-stage trials; most current “updates” in topical corticosteroids are bioequivalence and formulation-level work.
  • US exclusivity and patent leverage for WESTCORT is typically limited in mature dermatology categories; market access is usually driven by the presence or absence of unexpired Orange Book listings for the exact dosage form and strength.
  • Market outlook for the brand is generally flat-to-declining with ongoing unit-price erosion as generics remain interchangeable.
  • Competitive dynamics hinge on payer formularies, contracting, and supply rather than differentiation through new clinical evidence.

FAQs

  1. Is WESTCORT still under patent protection in the US?
  2. How many generic hydrocortisone valerate creams and ointments are Orange Book listed as AB-rated?
  3. What clinical endpoints are typically used in bioequivalence studies for topical hydrocortisone valerate?
  4. Do method-of-use patents exist for hydrocortisone valerate topical indications?
  5. What cream versus ointment formulation choices drive payer preference for hydrocortisone valerate products?

References

  1. (Not provided)

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.