CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR TRAMADOL HYDROCHLORIDE

505(b)(2) Clinical Trials for tramadol hydrochloride

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	NCT00640159 ↗	Tolerability and Efficacy of Switch From Oral Selegiline to Orally Disintegrating Selegiline (Zelapar) in Patients With Parkinson's Disease	Completed	Baylor College of Medicine	Phase 4	2007-01-01	Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease. Symptomatic therapy is primarily aimed at restoring dopamine function in the brain. Oral selegiline in conjunction with L-dopa has been a mainstay of therapy for PD patients experiencing motor fluctuations for many years. The mechanisms accounting for selegiline's beneficial adjunctive action in the treatment of PD are not fully understood. Inhibition of monoamine oxidase (MAO) type B (MAO-B) activity is generally considered to be of primary importance. Oral selegiline has low bio-availability and is typically dosed BID, for a total of 5-10 mg daily. Recently, the FDA approved a new orally disintegration tablet (ODT) formulation of selegiline, called ZelaparTM. This new formulation utilizes Zydis technology to dissolve in the mouth, with absorption through the oral mucosa, thereby largely bypassing the gut and avoiding first pass hepatic metabolism. This allows more active drug to be delivered at a lower dose. Consequently, Zelapar is dosed once-daily, up to 2.5 mg per day. There are no empirical data indicating whether the use of the new approved formulation of selegiline ODT (Zelapar) is superior or preferred by patients compared to traditional oral selegiline. It is believed that clinical efficacy will be preserved or enhanced, by delivering more active drug, with improved patient preference for the ODT formulation due to the once-daily dosing . The effectiveness of orally disintegrating selegiline as an adjunct to carbidopa/levodopa in the treatment of PD was established in a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial (n=140; 94 received orally disintegrating selegiline, 46 received placebo) of three months' duration. Patients randomized to orally disintegrating selegiline received a daily dose of 1.25 mg for the first 6 weeks and a daily dose of 2.5 mg for the last 6 weeks. Patients were all treated with levodopa and could additionally have been on dopamine agonists, anticholinergics, amantadine, or any combination of these during the trial. At 12 weeks, orally disintegrating selegiline-treated patients had an average of 2.2 hours per day less "OFF" time compared to baseline. Placebo treated patients had 0.6 hours per day less "OFF" time compared to baseline. These differences were significant (p < 0.001). Adverse events were very similar between drug and placebo.
OTC	NCT01588158 ↗	Patient Satisfaction With Pain Relief After Ambulatory Hand Surgery	Terminated	Massachusetts General Hospital	Phase 4	2012-07-01	Adequate pain relief has been a priority of the Joint Commission and is featured on national inpatient surveys such as the H-CAHPS. When considering methods for improving satisfaction with pain relief in the United States, a great deal of emphasis has been placed on opioid pain medications. Some of this emphasis on opioid pain medication is driven by the pharmaceutical industry and by advocacy groups with ties to the pharmaceutical industry. There is evidence that the "pain is the fifth vital sign" campaign of the Joint Commission led to an increased incidence of prescription of opioids, but there is less evidence of improved satisfaction with pain relief. There is some evidence of an increase in opioid-related adverse events. As the sales of opioids have tripled from 1999-2008, so has the number of deaths caused by opioid overdose; 14,800 in 2008. The number of visits to the Emergency Department for opioid overdose doubled between 2004 and 2008. Patients in other countries take far less opioid pain medication and are equally satisfied with pain relief. For instance, Lindenhovius et al. found in a retrospective study that Dutch patients take a weak (Tramadol) or no opioid pain medication after ankle fracture surgery and have comparable or better satisfaction with pain relief than American patients, most of whom take oxycodone. That study was repeated prospectively (unpublished) and confirmed that Dutch patients do not feel their pain is undertreated. A study of morphine use after a femur fracture demonstrated that American patients used far more than Vietnamese patients (30 mg/kg versus 0.9 mg/kg), but were more dissatisfied with their pain relief. These sociological differences are striking and suggest strongly that personal factors may be the most important determinant of satisfaction with pain relief. It is our impression that most American hand surgeons give patients a prescription for an opioid pain medication after carpal tunnel release, and that is certainly true in our practice. This seems to be based primarily on the outliers, and intended to avoid confrontation with patients that desire opioids; however, most patients take little or no narcotic pain medication, and many who do use the opioids complain of the side effects-nausea and pruritis in particular. It is therefore not clear whether routine opioids is the optimal pain management strategy after carpal tunnel release. In the study of Stahl et al. from Israel, patients were prescribed acetaminophen rather than opioids after carpal tunnel release and only 20 of 50 patients used acetaminophen; 30 patients did not use acetaminophen or other pain medication at all after the operation. Our aim is to determine if there is a difference in satisfaction with pain relief between patients advised to take opioids compared to patients advised to use over the counter acetaminophen after carpal tunnel release under local anesthesia. A secondary aim is to determine if personal factors account for more of the variability in satisfaction with pain relief than opioid strategy.
New Formulation	NCT03766984 ↗	Pharmacokinetic Non-interaction Study With a Fixed-dose Combination Tablet With Tramadol and Diclofenac	Completed	Grünenthal Colombiana S.A.	Phase 1	2015-06-07	The objective of the study was to evaluate whether or not there is a substantial pharmacokinetic interaction between diclofenac and tramadol in a new formulation of a fixed-dose combination of diclofenac 25 milligrams (mg) and tramadol 25 mg for oral administration. The study was conducted in healthy participants of both genders.
New Formulation	NCT03766984 ↗	Pharmacokinetic Non-interaction Study With a Fixed-dose Combination Tablet With Tramadol and Diclofenac	Completed	Grünenthal S.A.	Phase 1	2015-06-07	The objective of the study was to evaluate whether or not there is a substantial pharmacokinetic interaction between diclofenac and tramadol in a new formulation of a fixed-dose combination of diclofenac 25 milligrams (mg) and tramadol 25 mg for oral administration. The study was conducted in healthy participants of both genders.

All Clinical Trials for tramadol hydrochloride

Trial ID	Title	Status	Sponsor	Phase	Start Date	Summary
NCT00058357 ↗	Lidocaine Patch in Treating Cancer Patients With Neuropathic Pain After Surgery	Completed	National Cancer Institute (NCI)	Phase 3	2004-05-01	RATIONALE: A lidocaine patch may be effective in relieving numbness, tingling, and other symptoms of neuropathy. It is not yet known whether a lidocaine patch is effective in treating neuropathy in patients who have undergone surgery for cancer. PURPOSE: This randomized phase III trial is studying lidocaine patch to see how well it works compared to a placebo patch in relieving numbness, tingling, and other symptoms of neuropathy in patients who have undergone surgery for cancer.
NCT00058357 ↗	Lidocaine Patch in Treating Cancer Patients With Neuropathic Pain After Surgery	Completed	Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology	Phase 3	2004-05-01	RATIONALE: A lidocaine patch may be effective in relieving numbness, tingling, and other symptoms of neuropathy. It is not yet known whether a lidocaine patch is effective in treating neuropathy in patients who have undergone surgery for cancer. PURPOSE: This randomized phase III trial is studying lidocaine patch to see how well it works compared to a placebo patch in relieving numbness, tingling, and other symptoms of neuropathy in patients who have undergone surgery for cancer.
NCT00111046 ↗	Pain Relief - Tramadol Versus Ibuprofen	Unknown status	Royal Liverpool University Hospital	Phase 1/Phase 2	2001-02-01	The purpose of this study is to assess post operative pain following the insertion of radioactive plaque for choroidal melanoma in patients after receiving either ibuprofen or tramadol.
NCT00115752 ↗	Genetic Basis For Variation In NSAID Analgesia In A Clinical Model Of Acute Pain	Completed	National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)	Phase 2	2005-06-20	This study will evaluate how genetic makeup contributes to the variation in people regarding their sensitivity to and experience of pain. Scientists believe that differences in information found in genes may explain why an analgesic drug, that is, one that treats pain, works effectively for some people but not for others. The study will explore pain that is acute (fast and short period). Knowledge gained from this ongoing study may permit development of an individualized analgesic drug prescription. Patients ages 16 to 35 who are in good health and have been referred for removal of impacted wisdom teeth; who are not allergic to aspirin or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (known as NSAIDs), sulfites, or certain anesthetics; who are not pregnant or nursing; and who are willing to have a biopsy before and after dental surgery are eligible for this study. Patients will come to the clinic for one test visit and one treatment visit. During the first visit, a questionnaire will evaluate patients' psychological state, including mood and depression. There will be a clinical examination of their wisdom teeth. A blood sample of 10 milliliters (about 0.4 ounces) will be collected from the forearm to provide DNA material containing genes stored in cells. The primary genetic analysis will be done at NIH, although the DNA collected might also be sent to a laboratory outside NIH. DNA samples will be coded so that names of patients cannot be traced. During the second visit, two of the patients' lower wisdom teeth will be removed. Patients will be given a local anesthetic in the mouth and a sedative given through a vein in the arm. While the mouth is numb, a small piece of tissue will be removed from inside the cheek, near the wisdom tooth. It is the first biopsy. After the two wisdom teeth are removed, a small piece of tubing will be placed into both sides of the mouth where the teeth were removed. Every 20 minutes, for the next 3 hours, the researchers will collect inflammatory fluid from the tubing, to measure the chemicals thought to cause pain and swelling. Also every 20 minutes, patients will rate the pain they feel by answering questions. If there is pain before 3 hours following surgery, they will receive a dose of fentanyl to relieve moderate to severe pain. A second biopsy will occur 3 hours after surgery, to measure changes in chemicals produced in response to surgery. Immediately afterward, patients will receive 30 mg of ketorolac (Toradol) whether or not pain is felt. They will answer questionnaires about pain for 3 hours after receiving the drug, to rate how well it works. They will stay at the clinic up to 6 hours after the surgery. If pain is not relieved with ketorolac, patients will receive a one-time dose of tramadol, a pain medication for moderate to severe pain. After the study procedures are completed, patients will receive pain medication for pain after surgery. Patients will be monitored closely, because all drugs have side effects. Ketorolac is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, one that may cause gastrointestinal upset. Fentanyl is a powerful narcotic drug that is safe at the dosage used in this study, but stomach upset, dizziness, and breathing trouble may occur. Also, risks from the biopsy include discomfort from injecting the numbing medicine, infection, and bleeding. There may be discomfort from the sedative injected into the vein, and there may be bruising. Benefits from participating are having wisdom teeth removed at no cost as well as close monitoring before and after surgery. There are no plans to give patients the results of genetic tests or questionnaires. Years of research may be needed before such information has the chance to become meaningful.

Clinical Trial Conditions for tramadol hydrochloride

Condition Name

Condition Name for tramadol hydrochloride
Intervention	Trials
Pain	66
Postoperative Pain	59
Pain, Postoperative	37
Healthy	20

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for tramadol hydrochloride
Intervention	Trials
Pain, Postoperative	130
Osteoarthritis	33
Acute Pain	26
Chronic Pain	22

Clinical Trial Locations for tramadol hydrochloride

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for tramadol hydrochloride
Location	Trials
United States	173
Turkey	47
Egypt	40
Pakistan	27
China	24

Trials by US State

Trials by US State for tramadol hydrochloride
Location	Trials
Texas	17
Maryland	13
California	11
Florida	10
Kansas	8

Clinical Trial Progress for tramadol hydrochloride

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for tramadol hydrochloride
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
PHASE4	22
PHASE3	9
PHASE2	16

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for tramadol hydrochloride
Clinical Trial Phase	Trials
Completed	311
Recruiting	75
Unknown status	58

Clinical Trial Sponsors for tramadol hydrochloride

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for tramadol hydrochloride
Sponsor	Trials
Labopharm Inc.	15
Cairo University	13
Janssen Korea, Ltd., Korea	10

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for tramadol hydrochloride
Sponsor	Trials
Other	525
Industry	150
U.S. Fed	17

Last updated: July 26, 2026

Tramadol Hydrochloride Clinical Trials Update, Market Analysis, and Forecast (2026-2032)

Tramadol hydrochloride remains a mature, off-patent opioid analgesic in the US and most developed markets, with clinical activity concentrated in formulation improvements, abuse-deterrent strategies, and expanded evidence packages rather than new molecular entities. Commercial outlook is shaped by (1) opioid prescribing restrictions, (2) safety and dependence risk scrutiny, and (3) continued price pressure from multiple approved generics across immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (ER) products. Net market growth is expected to be low single-digit CAGR globally over 2026-2032, with volatility driven by regulatory enforcement, payer restrictions, and product mix shifts toward ER and abuse-deterrent offerings.

---

What clinical trials are ongoing for tramadol hydrochloride in 2026 and what are the main study themes?

Which trial types dominate the tramadol pipeline

Clinical activity for tramadol hydrochloride in recent cycles clusters into these categories:

• Formulation and bioavailability studies: comparative pharmacokinetics (PK), food-effect studies, and manufacturing comparability after scale-up or site changes.
• Abuse-deterrent and misuse-mitigation: studies targeting reduced extraction, tampering, or “dose dumping,” typically for ER products.
• Safety and real-world effectiveness evidence: observational studies and post-authorization commitments tied to opioid risk management.
• Special populations: renal/hepatic impairment, geriatric dosing, and bridging PK across demographics.

What endpoints regulators and payers emphasize

For tramadol, trials and evidence packages tend to prioritize:

• Analgesic response durability and tolerability
• Dependence, withdrawal, and misuse outcomes (where measured)
• PK consistency across formulations and routes
• Abuse-deterrence performance in proxy tampering models (for ER)

How trial signals typically translate into product strategy

Because tramadol is broadly genericized, sponsors focus on:

• Winning formulary positioning through tolerability claims and controlled-release differentiation
• Targeted labeling expansions through supplemental submissions
• Securing market share via supply reliability and cost competitiveness rather than new indications

---

What is the current market size for tramadol hydrochloride and how has it trended recently?

Market structure

Tramadol is marketed as:

• Immediate-release (IR) tablets/capsules and drops in many geographies
• Extended-release (ER) tablets in markets where ER is widely reimbursed
• Fixed-dose combinations with other analgesics in some countries (market definitions vary)

Demand drivers

• Chronic pain incidence and guideline-based stepwise analgesic use
• Long-running physician familiarity
• Availability of low-cost generics sustaining baseline volumes

Demand constraints

• Higher scrutiny of opioid risk, including tramadol-specific warnings and dependence potential
• Tighter prescribing requirements for opioids and payer prior authorization in some systems
• Substitution by non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants in certain formularies

---

Which companies control tramadol hydrochloride supply and what does the competitive landscape look like?

US competitive reality

The US market for tramadol hydrochloride is characterized by:

• Numerous generic entrants across dosage strengths and release profiles
• Ongoing interchangeability and pharmacy substitution dynamics
• Brand presence largely confined to specific ER/brand-origin products where differentiation persists

Global competitive map

Globally, competition is typically dominated by:

• Large multi-market generics companies
• Regional manufacturers with established distribution
• Sponsors maintaining ER differentiation and manufacturing capacity for controlled supply

Implication for pricing

• Pricing pressure persists for IR products due to high substitution
• ER products may sustain comparatively higher ASPs if they carry managed-release differentiation and abuse-deterrent differentiation (where applicable)

---

When does tramadol hydrochloride lose exclusivity in the US and how does it affect generic entry risk?

Exclusivity vs patent posture

Tramadol hydrochloride is a long-established active ingredient. In practical terms:

• Molecular and early formulation exclusivity are expired
• Remaining barriers are typically incremental (for specific ER platforms, manufacturing methods, or particular formulations)

Generic entry risk

• For most IR strengths and forms, entry risk is structurally low because genericization is already mature
• For any residual branded/differentiated ER products, entry risk depends on:
  • Whether relevant Orange Book listings still exist for the exact branded product
  • Whether the generics can design around listed patents and whether patent litigation/settlement blocks entry

---

What patents protect tramadol hydrochloride and how strong is the patent estate for new differentiation?

Patent estate characteristics

For tramadol, patent landscapes usually show:

• Limited remaining “core” protection tied to the active ingredient
• Fragmented protection around:
  • Extended-release matrices and coatings
  • Abuse-deterrent properties
  • Manufacturing processes and specific dissolution profiles
  • Method-of-use claims, which are harder to enforce if indications are broad and clinical standards overlap

How to interpret strength for investors or BD

• Litigation and licensing are typically concentrated on specific product lines, not the entire tramadol category
• For commercial planning, the actionable question is whether a differentiation patent blocks a specific branded ER SKU rather than whether “tramadol” itself is patented

---

What is the Orange Book status of tramadol hydrochloride products and which listings matter for Paragraph IV?

Orange Book listing logic

In practice, Paragraph IV challenges are relevant only when:

• A brand product lists patents in the Orange Book, and
• A generic applicant seeks market approval for the same active ingredient and formulation type covered by those listings.

For tramadol:

• Many products are already generic, reducing the opportunity set for new Paragraph IV fights
• Where ER branded products still list patents, those are the loci of potential Paragraph IV activity

---

What patent litigation affects tramadol hydrochloride and are there active cases shaping launch schedules?

Litigation pattern

Opioid analogs with generic saturation tend to show:

• Periodic district court disputes around ER-specific formulations
• Fewer “frontier” fights involving the active ingredient itself
• Settlement-driven entry for certain SKUs when infringement risk is non-trivial

Commercial effect

Where litigation exists, it can:

• Delay generic launch for specific ER formulations or strengths
• Push generics toward design-arounds or launch alternative SKUs

---

Which formulations are protected for tramadol hydrochloride (IR vs ER vs abuse-deterrent) and what delivery systems face the most IP barriers?

Formulation clusters

The most relevant formulation distinctions are:

• IR immediate-release: focus on bioequivalence and manufacturing consistency
• ER controlled-release: focus on dissolution profile and matrix/coating IP
• Abuse-deterrent ER platforms: focus on tamper resistance mechanisms and performance claims

Typical IP barrier profile

• ER controlled-release platforms have a higher probability of residual protection for:
  • Polymer/vehicle systems
  • Coating processes and drug-release mechanisms
• IR products generally have fewer meaningful residual barriers because the category is mature and heavily genericized

---

How does tramadol hydrochloride compare with other opioids on safety messaging and market positioning?

Competitive substitution dynamics

Tramadol competes against:

• Other weak opioids and centrally acting analgesics
• Non-opioid pathways (NSAIDs, acetaminophen combinations, adjuvant neuropathic pain agents)

Positioning reality

• Tramadol’s market position is tied to perceived tolerability compared with stronger opioids, but dependence and misuse risk keep it under opioid-class scrutiny
• As payer restrictions tighten, tramadol’s relative position depends on formulary status and required step edits

---

What is the regulatory status of tramadol hydrochloride in the US and major markets?

US

• Tramadol is an established opioid with ongoing risk management expectations consistent with opioid-class oversight.
• Labeling includes warnings related to dependence, misuse, and serious adverse effects.

Europe and key developed markets

• Usage and prescribing are constrained by opioid stewardship programs.
• ER products may face additional prescribing restrictions relative to IR depending on country policy.

Global pattern

Regulators focus on:

• Misuse and dependence risk controls
• Safety communications
• Periodic safety reporting and post-marketing commitments

---

How will tramadol hydrochloride market forecast evolve by segment through 2032?

Base-case projection (directional)

• Overall market: low single-digit CAGR, with volume stability in mature territories and modest growth elsewhere
• IR segment: flattish to modest decline in reimbursed channels due to substitution and restrictions
• ER segment: more stable growth in certain formularies, but capped by opioid oversight and generic parity dynamics
• Abuse-deterrent ER (where present): limited upside potential, more about share shifts than category expansion

Key sensitivities to model

1. Opioid prescribing policy enforcement intensity
2. Payer reimbursement rules (step edits, prior authorization)
3. Generic price erosion and supply competition
4. Product mix shift toward ER and controlled-release
5. Any labeling changes or new safety communications that change prescribing behavior

---

What generic launch scenarios exist for tramadol hydrochloride and what are the biggest barriers?

Scenario set

• Scenario A: continued generic share gain for IR through aggressive pricing and wide interchangeability
• Scenario B: ER share contest where differentiated release profiles and residual IP affect launch timing
• Scenario C: supply-driven positioning where distributors prefer reliable volume and predictable quality releases

Main barriers

• Patent/IP barriers are mainly formulation-specific for ER products
• Practical launch barriers include:
  • manufacturing scale and control for ER dissolution performance
  • stability and bioequivalence documentation
  • enforcement and labeling compliance for opioid risk messaging

---

Regional outlook: where will tramadol hydrochloride demand grow fastest and why?

High-level expectations

• North America and Western Europe: stable or slow growth driven by baseline opioid analgesic use under stewardship
• Emerging markets: more likely to show growth due to broader access and rising chronic pain prevalence, tempered by regulatory tightening

Growth drivers by region

• Reimbursement maturity and formulary access
• Distribution penetration
• Availability of generic supply at low price
• Local opioid policy tightening pace

---

Key Takeaways

• Tramadol hydrochloride is a mature opioid market with clinical activity concentrated in formulation and evidence-generation rather than new molecular breakthroughs.
• Competitive dynamics are dominated by generic availability and price pressure, with ER products offering the main differentiation levers.
• Exclusivity barriers for the active ingredient are effectively exhausted; residual IP risk is primarily product-line specific, especially for differentiated ER platforms.
• 2026-2032 growth is expected to be low single-digit globally, with segment-level shifts driven by opioid policy enforcement and payer formulary behavior.

---

FAQs

1) Are there any new indications being pursued for tramadol hydrochloride?

Clinical updates for tramadol commonly focus on formulation and expanded evidence rather than fundamentally new indications for the active ingredient class.

2) Does tramadol extended-release face more regulatory scrutiny than immediate-release?

In opioid stewardship frameworks, ER products often face stricter prescribing and monitoring expectations due to dosing intensity and misuse risk profiles.

3) Will abuse-deterrent tramadol formulations materially change the market?

They are more likely to shift share within ER segments than expand total category demand, given broad generic parity elsewhere.

4) How much does pricing erosion affect tramadol hydrochloride forecasting?

Pricing erosion is structurally high for IR due to interchangeability; ER pricing is comparatively more resilient but still exposed to generic competition and tender dynamics.

5) What are the most likely triggers for market volatility in tramadol?

Labeling changes, enforcement of opioid prescribing policies, and any SKU-specific IP disputes that delay ER launches are the highest-impact volatility drivers.

---

References

1. FDA. Drug Safety Communications and opioid-related safety communications (latest accessible postings). U.S. Food and Drug Administration website.
2. FDA. Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
3. ClinicalTrials.gov. Tramadol hydrochloride search results and study records. U.S. National Library of Medicine.