Mapracorat patents and clinical trials: Drug pipeline profiles for drugs in development

Title	Sponsor	Phase
1404003_OpenPsori.PlaqueTest to Eval.Eff.of Diff.Comp. to Mapracorat	Bayer	Phase 1
Corneal Endothelial Cell Density Changes, When Mapracorat Ophthalmic Suspension 3%, is Administered for 14 Days	Bausch & Lomb Incorporated	Phase 1
Mapracorat Ophthalmic Suspension, 3% for the Treatment of Ocular Inflammation and Pain Following Cataract Surgery	Bausch & Lomb Incorporated	Phase 3

Subscribe to access the full database, or Start Trial
Drugname	Patent Number	Patent Title	Patent Assignee	Estimated Expiration
>Drugname	>Patent Number	>Patent Title	>Patent Assignee	>Estimated Expiration

Last updated: September 4, 2026

Mapracorat is an investigational selective glucocorticoid receptor agonist that was developed primarily as an ophthalmic anti-inflammatory drug. Its lead program, BOL-303242-X, advanced into late-stage clinical testing for postoperative ocular inflammation and pain after cataract surgery but did not reach FDA approval. Public development activity appears dormant, and mapracorat has no FDA-approved product, Orange Book listing, marketed formulation, or established commercial revenue stream as of the latest publicly available records through 2024.

What is the current development status of mapracorat?

Mapracorat is not an approved medicine and does not appear to be an active commercial development program.

Development item	Status
Active ingredient	Mapracorat
Development code	BOL-303242-X; historical development materials also identify mapracorat as a selective glucocorticoid receptor agonist
Primary target	Glucocorticoid receptor
Lead dosage form	Ophthalmic suspension
Main indication studied	Postoperative inflammation and pain after cataract surgery
Other areas studied	Ocular inflammation and selected dermatologic inflammatory disorders
FDA approval	None identified
FDA regulatory exclusivity	None
Orange Book listing	None
Commercial product	None
Current public sponsor activity	No material active clinical or commercial program identified
Current revenue	Zero attributable product revenue

Mapracorat was designed to preserve anti-inflammatory glucocorticoid activity while reducing adverse effects associated with conventional corticosteroids. The molecule was investigated as a potentially safer alternative to ophthalmic steroids such as prednisolone acetate, dexamethasone, difluprednate, and loteprednol etabonate.

The program advanced further in ophthalmology than in dermatology. Published clinical work evaluated mapracorat ophthalmic suspension in postoperative inflammation following cataract surgery, but the development path did not produce an approved product. ClinicalTrials.gov and FDA databases do not identify an approved or actively marketed mapracorat medicine. [1-3]

What clinical development did mapracorat complete?

Mapracorat reached late-stage ophthalmic development, including studies in patients undergoing cataract surgery.

Ophthalmic development

The commercial rationale was clear: postoperative inflammation and pain are routinely treated with topical corticosteroids, but these products can increase intraocular pressure, delay wound healing, promote infection, and contribute to other ocular complications. A selective glucocorticoid receptor agonist could potentially compete on tolerability.

Clinical studies evaluated mapracorat ophthalmic suspension after cataract extraction. The reported endpoints included:

Anterior chamber cell reduction
Anterior chamber flare reduction
Ocular pain
Rescue medication use
Intraocular pressure
Ocular and systemic adverse events

Published studies indicated anti-inflammatory activity in postoperative settings. The available clinical record, however, did not lead to an FDA application, approval, or commercial launch. The absence of a product label and FDA approval letter means there is no validated regulatory basis for treating mapracorat as an approved competitor to existing ophthalmic corticosteroids. [1, 2]

Dermatology development

Mapracorat was also examined as a topical anti-inflammatory compound. The dermatology strategy focused on diseases such as atopic dermatitis, where a nonsteroidal or steroid-sparing anti-inflammatory product could address concerns over skin atrophy and other topical corticosteroid effects.

The dermatology program did not produce an approved topical product. There is no marketed mapracorat cream, ointment, lotion, or gel in the United States or major European markets.

When did mapracorat lose exclusivity?

Mapracorat has no FDA-granted regulatory exclusivity because it was never approved.

Patent exclusivity is more difficult to characterize than regulatory exclusivity. Historical development programs generated patent filings covering the compound, pharmaceutical compositions, ophthalmic suspensions, and therapeutic uses. However, a reliable commercial conclusion requires review of each patent family, continuation, terminal disclaimer, maintenance-fee record, and national-phase status.

The key business point is that any surviving patent rights would not restore market exclusivity without a viable regulatory program. No current Orange Book listing protects mapracorat, and no approved reference product exists against which an ANDA applicant could file a conventional Paragraph IV certification.

Exclusivity category	Mapracorat status
New chemical entity exclusivity	Not granted
Orphan-drug exclusivity	None identified
Pediatric exclusivity	None identified
Qualified infectious-disease exclusivity	Not applicable
Orange Book patents	None
Approved reference listed drug	None
Marketed-product exclusivity	None

What patents protect mapracorat?

Historical patent protection likely covered four principal categories:

The mapracorat chemical entity and related compounds.
Ophthalmic compositions containing mapracorat.
Suspension formulations designed to deliver the active ingredient to ocular tissue.
Methods for treating ocular or dermatologic inflammation.

Publicly available regulatory sources do not provide an active patent estate comparable to that of an approved branded drug. The FDA Orange Book lists patents only for approved products and therefore does not identify mapracorat patent rights. A live patent-family assessment would require a current review of USPTO, EPO, WIPO, and national registers.

Are formulation patents important for mapracorat?

Formulation patents would have been commercially important because mapracorat was developed as an ophthalmic suspension. Such patents can protect:

Particle size and crystal form
Suspension stability
Preservative systems
Dosage concentration
Vehicle composition
Uniformity of dose
Sterility and container-closure systems

Those claims can delay direct substitution even when compound claims expire. Their commercial value is limited here because mapracorat never obtained an approved reference product and no public product launch followed the clinical program.

Are method-of-use patents relevant?

Method-of-use claims could have targeted postoperative ocular inflammation, ocular pain after cataract surgery, dry-eye-associated inflammation, or inflammatory skin disorders. Method claims would not create a practical U.S. market without an approved product and a sponsor willing to pursue labeling and enforcement.

What is the FDA regulatory status of mapracorat?

Mapracorat has no FDA-approved application identified in Drugs@FDA and no Orange Book listing. The FDA therefore has not established:

An approved dosage regimen
A labeled indication
A reference listed drug
A safety profile sufficient for marketing
Approved manufacturing specifications
Postmarketing surveillance requirements
Regulatory exclusivity dates

Mapracorat cannot be treated as an FDA-approved alternative to loteprednol, prednisolone, dexamethasone, difluprednate, or other ophthalmic corticosteroids.

Are there Paragraph IV challenges or generic launch risks?

No meaningful Paragraph IV litigation risk is visible because mapracorat has no approved reference listed drug.

An ANDA applicant generally relies on an approved reference product. Without an approved mapracorat product, a generic company would not have the ordinary pathway for filing an ANDA directly against mapracorat. A future sponsor would likely need to pursue a new drug application, a 505(b)(2) application, or another applicable regulatory route rather than rely on standard generic substitution.

Generic-risk factor	Assessment
Approved reference product	None
Orange Book-listed patents	None
Paragraph IV certification	No conventional target identified
ANDA substitution pathway	Not established
505(b)(2) potential	Possible if a sponsor develops a product and can rely on appropriate prior findings
Litigation exposure	No material public mapracorat patent litigation identified
Automatic generic entry	Not applicable

A revived mapracorat program could face patent challenges from existing ophthalmic steroid manufacturers, but those risks would depend on the claims actually asserted and the age of the relevant patent families.

Which companies challenged or abandoned mapracorat?

No active generic challenger or public litigation campaign targeting mapracorat has been identified.

Historical development involved ophthalmology and pharmaceutical companies associated with the BOL-303242-X program. Public materials have linked the compound to Bausch + Lomb development efforts and to earlier research involving selective glucocorticoid receptor agonists. The development history also intersects with pharmaceutical assets associated with Merck and other research organizations, but the ownership chain for every historical patent and clinical asset should not be inferred from a single corporate name.

No current license, co-development agreement, acquisition, or settlement agreement has been publicly established as the basis for an active mapracorat program.

How strong is the mapracorat patent estate?

The patent estate has low practical strength as a commercial asset, even if isolated historical claims remain unexpired.

The assessment is driven by four factors:

No approved product exists.
No Orange Book-listed patent creates a defined regulatory barrier.
The lead ophthalmic program has not generated a marketed formulation.
The commercial sponsor has not demonstrated a current clinical or regulatory commitment.

A surviving composition or method patent could retain licensing value in a revival scenario. It would not, by itself, establish near-term market power. The value would depend on claim scope, remaining term, ownership, freedom to operate, and whether the sponsor can reproduce the clinical and manufacturing package.

How does mapracorat compare with competing ophthalmic steroids?

Mapracorat has a weak competitive position because competitors are approved, marketed, and supported by established manufacturing and reimbursement infrastructure.

Product	Active ingredient	Approval status	Main commercial advantage
Pred Forte	Prednisolone acetate	Approved	Long clinical history and broad physician familiarity
Durezol	Difluprednate	Approved	Potent postoperative anti-inflammatory activity
Lotemax	Loteprednol etabonate	Approved	Established “soft steroid” positioning and commercial access
Maxidex	Dexamethasone	Approved in multiple markets	Low-cost, familiar corticosteroid option
Mapracorat	Mapracorat	Not approved	Potential selective-receptor and tolerability differentiation

Mapracorat’s only credible differentiation would be a clinically meaningful reduction in steroid-related adverse effects while preserving postoperative efficacy. Existing products, particularly loteprednol, already occupy the safer-steroid segment. Any revival would therefore require superior data rather than simple proof of activity.

What market could mapracorat address?

The addressable market would consist mainly of prescription ophthalmic anti-inflammatory therapy, with potential secondary use in dermatology.

Ophthalmology opportunity

The most plausible initial market would be postoperative cataract-surgery treatment. Cataract surgery is a high-volume procedure, and topical anti-inflammatory therapy is routinely prescribed. Mapracorat could target:

Postoperative inflammation
Postoperative ocular pain
Patients at risk of elevated intraocular pressure
Patients requiring a steroid with a potentially improved safety profile
Surgeons seeking an alternative to generic corticosteroids

The market is difficult for a new entrant because generic prednisolone and dexamethasone are inexpensive, while branded loteprednol and difluprednate already have physician recognition and distribution.

Dermatology opportunity

A topical dermatology product could target atopic dermatitis or other inflammatory dermatoses. That market includes topical corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, PDE4 inhibitors, and JAK inhibitors. Mapracorat would face substantial competition from approved nonsteroidal therapies with established safety and reimbursement profiles.

What is the market projection for mapracorat?

The base-case commercial forecast is zero because mapracorat has no active product, no approved indication, and no disclosed launch plan.

A revival scenario would require a new sponsor to acquire or recreate the program, confirm patent and regulatory rights, conduct additional clinical work, and establish manufacturing. Under that scenario, the product would probably launch as a niche ophthalmic anti-inflammatory rather than a broad replacement for generic steroids.

Scenario	Probability assessment	Commercial outcome
No revival	Base case	No revenue and no market share
Asset licensing and clinical restart	Low	Development-stage valuation only
Ophthalmic approval after new trials	Very low	Niche postoperative anti-inflammatory product
Dermatology relaunch	Very low	Crowded steroid-sparing market with high trial and reimbursement risk
Broad replacement for generic steroids	Remote	Requires superior efficacy, safety, pricing, and access evidence

A successful relaunch would need:

A clear clinical safety advantage over prednisolone and loteprednol
A differentiated dosing schedule or delivery system
A modern manufacturing process
A defensible patent position
A 505(b)(2) or other efficient regulatory strategy, if available
Commercial access to ophthalmologists and cataract surgeons
Pricing that supports adoption despite low-cost generics

What manufacturing and intellectual-property barriers exist?

The main manufacturing challenge is producing a stable, sterile ophthalmic suspension with consistent particle size and dose uniformity. Ophthalmic products also require validated aseptic processing, container-closure integrity, preservative control where applicable, and demonstrated shelf stability.

The principal intellectual-property barriers are different from those faced by a conventional generic:

Historical compound claims may have limited remaining life.
Formulation claims may be narrow or expired.
Ownership may have changed through corporate transactions.
Freedom-to-operate issues may involve delivery systems or manufacturing methods rather than mapracorat itself.
A revived product would need new clinical, formulation, or device claims to support commercial exclusivity.

What is the investment outlook for mapracorat?

Mapracorat has option value, not current product value.

The asset could attract interest only if a sponsor identifies a credible path to:

Obtain clean rights to the compound and relevant formulation technology.
Confirm that prior clinical data can support a new regulatory submission.
Demonstrate a meaningful safety advantage over approved ocular steroids.
Secure patent protection for a current formulation or delivery system.
Finance late-stage clinical development in a competitive market.

Absent those steps, mapracorat should be valued as an inactive or dormant development asset. There is no basis for projecting near-term sales, generic erosion, royalty income, or regulatory exclusivity.

Key Takeaways

Mapracorat is an unapproved selective glucocorticoid receptor agonist.
The lead program, BOL-303242-X, reached late-stage ophthalmic studies but did not produce an FDA-approved product.
No Orange Book listing, FDA exclusivity period, marketed product, or attributable revenue has been identified.
Conventional Paragraph IV litigation and automatic generic substitution are not current risks because no reference listed drug exists.
Historical compound, formulation, and method-of-use patents may exist, but their current enforceability and ownership require family-level review.
The base-case market projection is zero.
A revival would require new clinical, regulatory, manufacturing, and commercial investment.
The most viable target would be a differentiated postoperative ophthalmic anti-inflammatory product, not a broad generic-steroid replacement.

FAQs

Is mapracorat available by prescription?

No. Mapracorat is not an FDA-approved or marketed prescription medicine.

Is mapracorat the same as loteprednol?

No. Both were investigated as corticosteroid-related anti-inflammatory agents, but mapracorat and loteprednol are different active ingredients with different development histories.

Can a generic company launch mapracorat?

Not through the ordinary ANDA pathway against an approved mapracorat reference product, because no such product exists. A future sponsor would need to pursue an applicable new-drug regulatory pathway.

Did mapracorat fail clinical trials?

Mapracorat demonstrated clinical activity in investigational ophthalmic studies, but the program did not progress to FDA approval or commercialization. Public records do not establish a single definitive failure event as the sole reason for discontinuation.

Does mapracorat have commercial licensing value?

Potentially, but only as a dormant development asset. Commercial value would depend on surviving rights, clinical-data access, formulation know-how, and a credible strategy for renewed ophthalmic development.

References

ClinicalTrials.gov. (n.d.). Mapracorat and BOL-303242-X clinical study records. U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://clinicaltrials.gov/
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Drugs@FDA: FDA-approved drugs. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations, Orange Book. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ob/
Schäcke, H., Döcke, W.-D., & Asadulli, K. (2002). Mechanisms involved in the side effects of glucocorticoids. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 96(1), 23-43.
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (n.d.). Patent Center. https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/

US Patents	0
International Patents	0
US Patent Applications	181
WIPO Patent Applications	59
Japanese Patent Applications	30
Clinical Trial Progress	Phase 3 (2010-11-01)
Vendors	35

Investigational Drug Information for Mapracorat

What is the drug development status for Mapracorat?

Summary for Mapracorat

Recent Clinical Trials for Mapracorat

Clinical Trial Summary for Mapracorat

Top disease conditions for Mapracorat

Top clinical trial sponsors for Mapracorat

US Patents for Mapracorat

Mapracorat Development Update and Market Projection