Last Updated: May 12, 2026

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR PROPOFOL


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


505(b)(2) Clinical Trials for propofol

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
OTC NCT01691690 ↗ Analgesic Effect of IV Acetaminophen in Tonsillectomies Completed Nationwide Children's Hospital Phase 2 2012-10-01 Acetaminophen (paracetamol) is a first-line antipyretic and analgesic for mild and moderate pain for pediatric patients. Its common use (particularly in oral form) is underscored by its wide therapeutic window, safety profile, over the counter accessibility, lack of adverse systemic effects (as compared with NSAIDS and opioids) when given in appropriate doses. Although the exact anti-nociceptive mechanisms of acetaminophen continue to be elucidated, these mechanisms appear to be multi-factorial and include central inhibition of the cyclo-oxygenase (COX) enzyme leading to decreased production of prostaglandins from arachidonic acid, interference with serotonergic descending pain pathways, indirect activation of cannabinoid 1 (CB1) receptors and inhibition of nitric oxide pathways through N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) or substance P. Of the above mechanisms, the most commonly known is that of central inhibition of COX enzymes by which the decreased production of prostaglandins diminish the release of excitatory transmitters of substance P and glutamate which are both involved in nociceptive transmission (Anderson, 2008; Smith, 2011). To date, several studies have shown acetaminophen's opioid sparing effect in the pediatric population when given by the rectal or intravenous routes (Korpela et al, 1999; Dashti et al, 2009; Hong et al, 2010).
New Combination NCT03089905 ↗ A Study to Compare the Long-term Outcomes After Two Different Anaesthetics Recruiting Baylor College of Medicine Phase 3 2017-08-10 There is considerable evidence that most general anaesthetics modulate brain development in animal studies. The impact is greater with longer durations of exposure and in younger animals. There is great controversy over whether or not these animal data are relevant to human clinical scenarios. The changes seen in preclinical studies are greatest with GABA agonists and NMDA antagonists such as volatile anaesthetics (eg sevoflurane), propofol, midazolam, ketamine, and nitrous oxide. There is less evidence for an effect with opioid (such as remifentanil) or with alpha 2 agonists (such as dexmedetomidine). Some, but not all, human cohort studies show an association between exposure to anaesthesia in infancy or early childhood and later changes in cognitive tests, school performance or risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders. The evidence is weak due to possible confounding. A recent well designed cohort study (the PANDA study) comparing young children that had hernia repair to their siblings found no evidence for a difference in a range of detailed neuropsychological tests. In that study most children were exposed to up to two hours of anaesthesia. The only trial (the GAS trial) has compared children having hernia repair under regional or general anesthesia and has found no evidence for a difference in neurodevelopment when tested at two years of age. The GAS and PANDA studies confirm the animal data that short exposure is unlikely to cause any neurodevelopmental impact. The impact of longer exposures is still unknown. In humans the strongest evidence for an association between surgery and poor neurodevelopmental outcome is in infants having major surgery. However, this is also the group where confounding is most likely. The aim of our study is to see if a new combination of anaesthetic drugs results in a better long-term developmental outcome than the current standard of care for children having anaesthesia expected to last 2 hours or longer. Children will be randomised to receive either a low dose sevoflurane/remifentanil/dexmedetomidine or standard dose sevoflurane anaesthetic. They will receive a neurodevelopmental assessment at 3 years of age to assess global cognitive function.
New Combination NCT03089905 ↗ A Study to Compare the Long-term Outcomes After Two Different Anaesthetics Recruiting Boston Children's Hospital Phase 3 2017-08-10 There is considerable evidence that most general anaesthetics modulate brain development in animal studies. The impact is greater with longer durations of exposure and in younger animals. There is great controversy over whether or not these animal data are relevant to human clinical scenarios. The changes seen in preclinical studies are greatest with GABA agonists and NMDA antagonists such as volatile anaesthetics (eg sevoflurane), propofol, midazolam, ketamine, and nitrous oxide. There is less evidence for an effect with opioid (such as remifentanil) or with alpha 2 agonists (such as dexmedetomidine). Some, but not all, human cohort studies show an association between exposure to anaesthesia in infancy or early childhood and later changes in cognitive tests, school performance or risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders. The evidence is weak due to possible confounding. A recent well designed cohort study (the PANDA study) comparing young children that had hernia repair to their siblings found no evidence for a difference in a range of detailed neuropsychological tests. In that study most children were exposed to up to two hours of anaesthesia. The only trial (the GAS trial) has compared children having hernia repair under regional or general anesthesia and has found no evidence for a difference in neurodevelopment when tested at two years of age. The GAS and PANDA studies confirm the animal data that short exposure is unlikely to cause any neurodevelopmental impact. The impact of longer exposures is still unknown. In humans the strongest evidence for an association between surgery and poor neurodevelopmental outcome is in infants having major surgery. However, this is also the group where confounding is most likely. The aim of our study is to see if a new combination of anaesthetic drugs results in a better long-term developmental outcome than the current standard of care for children having anaesthesia expected to last 2 hours or longer. Children will be randomised to receive either a low dose sevoflurane/remifentanil/dexmedetomidine or standard dose sevoflurane anaesthetic. They will receive a neurodevelopmental assessment at 3 years of age to assess global cognitive function.
New Combination NCT03089905 ↗ A Study to Compare the Long-term Outcomes After Two Different Anaesthetics Recruiting Boston Children’s Hospital Phase 3 2017-08-10 There is considerable evidence that most general anaesthetics modulate brain development in animal studies. The impact is greater with longer durations of exposure and in younger animals. There is great controversy over whether or not these animal data are relevant to human clinical scenarios. The changes seen in preclinical studies are greatest with GABA agonists and NMDA antagonists such as volatile anaesthetics (eg sevoflurane), propofol, midazolam, ketamine, and nitrous oxide. There is less evidence for an effect with opioid (such as remifentanil) or with alpha 2 agonists (such as dexmedetomidine). Some, but not all, human cohort studies show an association between exposure to anaesthesia in infancy or early childhood and later changes in cognitive tests, school performance or risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders. The evidence is weak due to possible confounding. A recent well designed cohort study (the PANDA study) comparing young children that had hernia repair to their siblings found no evidence for a difference in a range of detailed neuropsychological tests. In that study most children were exposed to up to two hours of anaesthesia. The only trial (the GAS trial) has compared children having hernia repair under regional or general anesthesia and has found no evidence for a difference in neurodevelopment when tested at two years of age. The GAS and PANDA studies confirm the animal data that short exposure is unlikely to cause any neurodevelopmental impact. The impact of longer exposures is still unknown. In humans the strongest evidence for an association between surgery and poor neurodevelopmental outcome is in infants having major surgery. However, this is also the group where confounding is most likely. The aim of our study is to see if a new combination of anaesthetic drugs results in a better long-term developmental outcome than the current standard of care for children having anaesthesia expected to last 2 hours or longer. Children will be randomised to receive either a low dose sevoflurane/remifentanil/dexmedetomidine or standard dose sevoflurane anaesthetic. They will receive a neurodevelopmental assessment at 3 years of age to assess global cognitive function.
New Combination NCT03089905 ↗ A Study to Compare the Long-term Outcomes After Two Different Anaesthetics Recruiting Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Phase 3 2017-08-10 There is considerable evidence that most general anaesthetics modulate brain development in animal studies. The impact is greater with longer durations of exposure and in younger animals. There is great controversy over whether or not these animal data are relevant to human clinical scenarios. The changes seen in preclinical studies are greatest with GABA agonists and NMDA antagonists such as volatile anaesthetics (eg sevoflurane), propofol, midazolam, ketamine, and nitrous oxide. There is less evidence for an effect with opioid (such as remifentanil) or with alpha 2 agonists (such as dexmedetomidine). Some, but not all, human cohort studies show an association between exposure to anaesthesia in infancy or early childhood and later changes in cognitive tests, school performance or risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders. The evidence is weak due to possible confounding. A recent well designed cohort study (the PANDA study) comparing young children that had hernia repair to their siblings found no evidence for a difference in a range of detailed neuropsychological tests. In that study most children were exposed to up to two hours of anaesthesia. The only trial (the GAS trial) has compared children having hernia repair under regional or general anesthesia and has found no evidence for a difference in neurodevelopment when tested at two years of age. The GAS and PANDA studies confirm the animal data that short exposure is unlikely to cause any neurodevelopmental impact. The impact of longer exposures is still unknown. In humans the strongest evidence for an association between surgery and poor neurodevelopmental outcome is in infants having major surgery. However, this is also the group where confounding is most likely. The aim of our study is to see if a new combination of anaesthetic drugs results in a better long-term developmental outcome than the current standard of care for children having anaesthesia expected to last 2 hours or longer. Children will be randomised to receive either a low dose sevoflurane/remifentanil/dexmedetomidine or standard dose sevoflurane anaesthetic. They will receive a neurodevelopmental assessment at 3 years of age to assess global cognitive function.
New Combination NCT03089905 ↗ A Study to Compare the Long-term Outcomes After Two Different Anaesthetics Recruiting Erasmus Medical Center Phase 3 2017-08-10 There is considerable evidence that most general anaesthetics modulate brain development in animal studies. The impact is greater with longer durations of exposure and in younger animals. There is great controversy over whether or not these animal data are relevant to human clinical scenarios. The changes seen in preclinical studies are greatest with GABA agonists and NMDA antagonists such as volatile anaesthetics (eg sevoflurane), propofol, midazolam, ketamine, and nitrous oxide. There is less evidence for an effect with opioid (such as remifentanil) or with alpha 2 agonists (such as dexmedetomidine). Some, but not all, human cohort studies show an association between exposure to anaesthesia in infancy or early childhood and later changes in cognitive tests, school performance or risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders. The evidence is weak due to possible confounding. A recent well designed cohort study (the PANDA study) comparing young children that had hernia repair to their siblings found no evidence for a difference in a range of detailed neuropsychological tests. In that study most children were exposed to up to two hours of anaesthesia. The only trial (the GAS trial) has compared children having hernia repair under regional or general anesthesia and has found no evidence for a difference in neurodevelopment when tested at two years of age. The GAS and PANDA studies confirm the animal data that short exposure is unlikely to cause any neurodevelopmental impact. The impact of longer exposures is still unknown. In humans the strongest evidence for an association between surgery and poor neurodevelopmental outcome is in infants having major surgery. However, this is also the group where confounding is most likely. The aim of our study is to see if a new combination of anaesthetic drugs results in a better long-term developmental outcome than the current standard of care for children having anaesthesia expected to last 2 hours or longer. Children will be randomised to receive either a low dose sevoflurane/remifentanil/dexmedetomidine or standard dose sevoflurane anaesthetic. They will receive a neurodevelopmental assessment at 3 years of age to assess global cognitive function.
>Trial Type >Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

All Clinical Trials for propofol

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT00004424 ↗ Randomized Study of Propofol Versus Fentanyl and Midazolam in Pediatric Patients Requiring Mechanical Ventilation and Sedation Therapy Completed Case Western Reserve University N/A 1996-07-01 OBJECTIVES: I. Assess the degree of amnesia afforded by study sedatives relative to the patient's intensive care unit experiences. II. Evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol monotherapy compared to a conventional sedative regimen consisting of continuous infusion fentanyl and midazolam. III. Perform a detailed pharmacoeconomic evaluation of propofol sedation compared to combination drug therapy in acutely ill, mechanically ventilated pediatric patients.
NCT00004424 ↗ Randomized Study of Propofol Versus Fentanyl and Midazolam in Pediatric Patients Requiring Mechanical Ventilation and Sedation Therapy Completed FDA Office of Orphan Products Development N/A 1996-07-01 OBJECTIVES: I. Assess the degree of amnesia afforded by study sedatives relative to the patient's intensive care unit experiences. II. Evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol monotherapy compared to a conventional sedative regimen consisting of continuous infusion fentanyl and midazolam. III. Perform a detailed pharmacoeconomic evaluation of propofol sedation compared to combination drug therapy in acutely ill, mechanically ventilated pediatric patients.
NCT00095251 ↗ MENDS Study: Trial in Ventilated ICU Patients Comparing an Alpha2 Agonist Versus a Gamma Aminobutyric Acid (GABA)-Agonist to Determine Delirium Rates, Efficacy of Sedation, Analgesia and Discharge Cognitive Status Completed Vanderbilt University Phase 2 2004-08-01 Delirium has recently been shown as a predictor of death, increased cost, and longer length of stay in ventilated patients. Sedative and analgesic medications relieve anxiety and pain, but may contribute to patients' transitioning into delirium. It is possible that modifying the paradigm for sedation using novel therapies targeted at different receptors, such as dexmedetomidine targeting alpha2 receptors and sparing the GABA receptors, could provide efficacious sedation yet reduce the development, duration, and severity of acute brain dysfunction (delirium).
NCT00095251 ↗ MENDS Study: Trial in Ventilated ICU Patients Comparing an Alpha2 Agonist Versus a Gamma Aminobutyric Acid (GABA)-Agonist to Determine Delirium Rates, Efficacy of Sedation, Analgesia and Discharge Cognitive Status Completed Vanderbilt University Medical Center Phase 2 2004-08-01 Delirium has recently been shown as a predictor of death, increased cost, and longer length of stay in ventilated patients. Sedative and analgesic medications relieve anxiety and pain, but may contribute to patients' transitioning into delirium. It is possible that modifying the paradigm for sedation using novel therapies targeted at different receptors, such as dexmedetomidine targeting alpha2 receptors and sparing the GABA receptors, could provide efficacious sedation yet reduce the development, duration, and severity of acute brain dysfunction (delirium).
NCT00125398 ↗ GPI 15715 For Sedation in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Setting Completed Eisai Inc. Phase 2 2005-07-01 Patients who are in the intensive care unit after surgery and require mechanical breathing support (intubation and ventilation) usually require sedation to avoid agitation and excessive stress responses. Short-acting sedatives such as midazolam and propofol are the drugs typically used for this. Propofol provides for fast sedation and fast recovery from sedation. Midazolam is slower to sedation and slower for recovery, but may provide some advantages over propofol, such as a lower incidence of hypotension (low blood pressure). This study will look at propofol compared to a product with fast sedation and recovery like that of propofol but with less of a chance for hypotension like with midazolam. Patients will be treated with the product for up to 8 hours and then will be monitored for 8 hours following treatment.
NCT00125424 ↗ Study of AQUAVAN® Injection (AQUAVAN; Fospropofol Disodium) for Sedation During Colonoscopy Completed Eisai Inc. Phase 2/Phase 3 2005-07-01 Very often, patients receive sedative medication before a diagnostic, therapeutic, or surgical procedure to help them relax, keep them calm, and to relieve them from pain. This is called procedural sedation. During procedural (mild to moderate) sedation, a patient is first given a pain-relief medication (analgesic) and then a medication to help him/her relax and keep him/her calm (sedative). Propofol is the drug commonly used for sedation because it releases immediately into the blood stream and causes fast sedation. AQUAVAN (fospropofol disodium) is made as a slow release version of propofol, allowing for fast sedation and possibly faster recovery and discharge. This study is intended to compare several different doses of AQUAVAN in patients having a colonoscopy in order to find the right dose that will get patients to a level of mild to moderate (procedural) sedation.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for propofol

Condition Name

Condition Name for propofol
Intervention Trials
Anesthesia 216
Postoperative Pain 79
Pain 71
Pain, Postoperative 69
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for propofol
Intervention Trials
Pain, Postoperative 191
Delirium 78
Emergence Delirium 54
Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting 52
[disabled in preview] 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for propofol

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for propofol
Location Trials
United States 482
China 377
Egypt 253
Korea, Republic of 164
France 88
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for propofol
Location Trials
New York 42
California 39
Texas 38
Ohio 29
Illinois 28
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for propofol

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for propofol
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
PHASE4 107
PHASE3 25
PHASE2 22
[disabled in preview] 929
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for propofol
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Completed 1096
Recruiting 404
Unknown status 229
[disabled in preview] 417
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for propofol

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for propofol
Sponsor Trials
Yonsei University 59
Assiut University 43
Ain Shams University 41
[disabled in preview] 81
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for propofol
Sponsor Trials
Other 2764
Industry 187
OTHER_GOV 32
[disabled in preview] 59
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Propofol: Clinical Trials Update, Market Analysis and Projection

Last updated: April 26, 2026

Propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol) is a widely used intravenous anesthetic and sedation agent. Clinical development is largely incremental (new formulations, device-administered delivery, and expansion to specific clinical workflows) rather than line-extending claims anchored to propofol’s core mechanism. Market dynamics center on hospital procurement, supply reliability, generic competition, and use in procedural sedation and general anesthesia rather than on blockbuster, patent-protected brand substitution.

What is propofol’s clinical development status?

Trial activity: ongoing, but not mechanism-changing

Propofol’s modern clinical trial footprint is dominated by:

  • Formulation and administration studies (e.g., emulsion variants, preservatives/excipients optimization, concentration comparisons)
  • Procedural sedation studies in endoscopy and interventional settings
  • Comparative trials against other sedation or anesthesia strategies
  • Device-enabled delivery and workflow optimization (e.g., target-controlled infusion comparisons, nurse-administered sedation pathways)

Indications with the highest trial velocity

In practice, trial activity clusters around three use cases:

  1. Operating room general anesthesia induction and maintenance (as part of anesthesia protocols rather than standalone claims)
  2. Procedural sedation (notably endoscopy, interventional radiology, and surgery-adjacent sedation models)
  3. ICU sedation and mechanical ventilation sedation protocols (less common than procedural sedation studies, but still present)

Why propofol’s trials look “incremental”

Propofol has a long commercial history and broad off-patent use in most markets. That structure shifts sponsor incentives toward:

  • Differentiating excipient profile, stability, and administration behavior
  • Reducing administration time or dosing errors
  • Improving patient comfort and recovery metrics within sedation protocols

Clinical trial implication for R&D budgets: trial spend tends to focus on endpoints that matter to procurement committees and clinical governance (time-to-recovery, hypotension incidence, dose reduction, protocol compliance), not on demonstrating novel pharmacology.


What does the propofol market look like today?

Demand drivers

Propofol demand is anchored to recurring use in:

  • General anesthesia (routine surgical volume)
  • Procedural sedation (high-volume elective procedures and outpatient endoscopy)
  • Sedation management in monitored anesthesia care pathways

Demand is also shaped by:

  • Patient throughput and turnover targets in hospitals
  • Sedation governance requirements (protocol standardization)
  • Supply disruptions and manufacturing capacity constraints that propagate quickly into hospitals

Competitive structure: mostly generic

Across major geographies, propofol is broadly available as generics and biosimilar-like substitutes in the strict sense of formulation equivalence rather than biologics.

Key competitive variables:

  • Formulation concentration (commonly 1% and 2% presentations)
  • Emulsion excipient package (affects viscosity and administration handling)
  • Packaging and procurement contracts (tendering and substitution policies)
  • Safety-management requirements (monitoring, line management, and controlled access)

Pricing pressure and contract dynamics

Because propofol is off-patent in most jurisdictions, price competition is intense. Market shares are strongly tied to:

  • Tender cycles
  • National procurement frameworks (where applicable)
  • Hospital purchasing consolidation across product lines (introduction of preferred formularies)

How does supply and regulation affect propofol availability?

Manufacturing and substitution risk

Propofol’s market is sensitive to:

  • Limited number of qualified manufacturers in some regions
  • Emulsion production capacity constraints
  • Shipping and temperature stability handling requirements

Regulatory and label-driven decisions

Hospitals often constrain substitution based on:

  • Label alignment with dosing protocols
  • Differences in excipient composition and warning language
  • Local policy for interchangeability in sedation governance

Net effect: even when generics are approved, interchangeability in practice depends on procurement and safety policy, not solely regulatory approval.


What is the market outlook and projection for propofol?

Growth thesis

Propofol’s forward growth typically tracks:

  • Surgical and procedural volume growth
  • Outpatient shift and procedural sedation expansion
  • Ongoing adoption of standardized sedation pathways in endoscopy and interventional care

Growth headwinds

  • Continued generic price erosion
  • Competitive substitution within sedatives/anesthetics
  • Supply constraints that can cap service capacity during shortages
  • Regulatory and safety scrutiny that can raise governance costs

Projection approach

Given off-patent status and generic competition, the most relevant projections are:

  • Volume growth (units used) rather than price growth
  • Market value growth that lags volume growth due to price compression
  • Segment shifts toward outpatient procedural sedation, which can increase per-patient utilization within protocols

Market view: expect modest market value growth with stronger volume resilience, unless a major supply shock or substitution policy change re-prices the category.


Clinical trials update: what endpoints are driving recent and typical studies?

Common trial endpoints in propofol studies include:

  • Hemodynamic stability (hypotension frequency and severity)
  • Time-to-induction and time-to-recovery (sedation depth control)
  • Respiratory safety (hypoxia, need for airway support)
  • Total propofol dose per procedure and per protocol
  • Patient and clinician reported tolerability within sedation pathways

These endpoints map directly to procurement concerns:

  • Reduced rescue interventions
  • Predictable recovery for turnover targets
  • Lower monitoring burden within sedation governance

Competitive positioning: where could differentiation still matter?

Even without “new drug” mechanism claims, differentiation can still occur via:

  • Formulation handling (viscosity, administration behavior)
  • Stability and shelf-life within hospital procurement models
  • Protocol integration with sedation workflows (device compatibility, dosing systems)
  • Safety management (line management, infusion monitoring, governance-aligned packaging)

This is where incremental clinical programs and small comparative trials typically land value.


Key Takeaways

  • Propofol clinical development is mostly incremental, focused on formulations, sedation workflows, and comparative protocol performance rather than novel mechanism breakthroughs.
  • The market is generic-driven with heavy pricing pressure, so market value growth depends on volume resilience and contract-driven procurement dynamics.
  • Forward demand is supported by surgical and procedural volume growth and expansion of outpatient procedural sedation, while headwinds include price compression and occasional supply constraints.
  • Differentiation opportunities exist mainly in administration handling, protocol predictability, and governance-aligned safety performance, not in core pharmacology.

FAQs

1) Is propofol under active clinical development?

Yes, but the trial pattern is incremental, centered on sedation protocols, administration approaches, and formulation-related performance within established indications.

2) What indications pull the most clinical trial activity for propofol?

Procedural sedation (especially high-throughput procedural settings like endoscopy) and operating room anesthesia protocols are the dominant clusters.

3) Does the market treat propofol as a protected, brand-differentiated product?

No. In most major markets it is generic and procurement-driven, so differentiation is execution- and formulation-based.

4) What are the most valuable clinical endpoints for propofol adoption?

Hemodynamic stability, recovery time, respiratory safety, and total dose efficiency within standardized sedation protocols.

5) How should forecasts be modeled for propofol?

Model volume growth tied to procedure volume and protocol adoption, then layer in price erosion from generics and contract tender outcomes to estimate market value.


References

  1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Drug databases and labeling for propofol (various products). https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/
  2. European Medicines Agency (EMA). EPAR and related information for propofol-containing products. https://www.ema.europa.eu/
  3. ClinicalTrials.gov. Propofol search results and study records. https://clinicaltrials.gov/

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.