Eli Lilly R&D profile, November 2026: pipeline, trials and peer comparison
This profile describes Eli Lilly’s R&D as of 7 November 2026. On that date, Lilly and the companies it has acquired led 240 active trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, 102 of them in Phase 3. Its research has moved decisively towards metabolic disease, and its near-term readouts are concentrated there. It is a picture of what Lilly has registered, published and had approved: it says nothing about its finances, and it is not investment advice.
Key findings
- A large late-stage book. 102 of the 240 active trials are in Phase 3, level with Merck & Co. and behind only AstraZeneca among the five companies we compared.
- Metabolic disease has doubled. Lilly started 172 trials touching nutritional and metabolic disease from 2021 onward, against 83 in 2016–2020. Cancer trials fell from 87 in 2011–2015 to 52.
- Twelve never-approved drugs are in active Phase 3 trials, led by eloralintide (18 active trials at any phase), brenipatide (13) and retatrutide (10).
- Nineteen active Phase 3 trials are due to reach primary completion within a year, on sponsor estimates. Fifteen test tirzepatide, orforglipron or retatrutide.
- Three new applications in about a year. FDA first approved imlunestrant in September 2025, orforglipron in April 2026 and insulin efsitora alfa in September 2026.
- The patent view is half blind. Lilly’s 21 marketed biologics, including Kisunla and Trulicity, have no patent data in the Orange Book.
All counts are of trials that a Lilly company leads as sponsor. “Active” means recruiting, not yet recruiting, active but not recruiting, or enrolling by invitation. The definitions are under How we counted, and the method is written up in How to build a pharma company R&D profile so you can repeat it for another company.
How big the pipeline is
The registry holds 2,012 interventional trials led by Lilly or a company it now owns, 240 of them active.
The numbers
| Phase | Active trials |
|---|---|
| Phase 1 | 78 |
| Phase 1/2 | 10 |
| Phase 2 | 48 |
| Phase 2/3 | 1 |
| Phase 3 | 102 |
| No phase | 1 |
| Total | 240 |
Lilly started between 71 and 93 trials a year from 2016 to 2024, then 92 in both 2025 and 2026. Eighteen of the 2026 starts are still planned dates rather than actual ones. Phase 4 and observational studies are outside our trial data, so the post-marketing work is not counted here.
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: trial counts by phase and year
We asked:
Define Lilly trials as studies in aact whose lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’) has one of exactly these names: ‘Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’, ‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’, ‘Dermira, Inc.’, ‘DICE Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’, ‘Prevail Therapeutics’, ‘Morphic Therapeutic, Inc. (A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company)’, ‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Vaccine Company, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘POINT Biopharma, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Scorpion Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Ajax Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’. Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). How many Lilly trials are there in all? How many are active? Break the active ones down by phase (Early Phase 1 and Phase 1 together, Phase 1/2, Phase 2, Phase 2/3, Phase 3, and no phase). Then give Lilly trial starts by year for 2016 to 2026, saying how many of the 2026 starts have an ESTIMATED rather than ACTUAL start date.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
Of the 92 trials with a 2026 start date, 18 are marked ESTIMATED and 74 ACTUAL
Where the research is going
Trials by the disease areas of their MeSH condition terms. A trial counts once in each area it touches, so the columns overlap and don’t add up to the total.
The numbers
| Area | 2011–2015 | 2016–2020 | 2021 onward |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nutritional and metabolic diseases | 83 | 83 | 172 |
| Endocrine diseases | 85 | 86 | 84 |
| Cancer (neoplasms) | 87 | 55 | 52 |
| Nervous system diseases | 51 | 47 | 45 |
| Immune system diseases | 47 | 56 | 47 |
| Mental disorders | 47 | 21 | 26 |
| Cardiovascular diseases | 6 | 4 | 25 |
| All trials started in the period | 437 | 401 | 506 |
Three shifts stand out: metabolic disease doubled, cancer fell by 40% from its 2011–2015 level, and cardiovascular disease moved from almost nothing to 25 trials. The last period runs nearly six years and includes some planned starts, so it is a little longer than the others. Between 39% and 49% of the trials in each period fall in none of these areas, mostly because they have no MeSH term.
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: disease areas over time
We asked:
Using the same Lilly trials, count trials started in 2011-2015, 2016-2020 and 2021 onward in each of these areas, taken from the trial’s own MeSH condition terms (browse_conditions with mesh_type = ‘mesh-list’) joined to mesh_terms on downcase_mesh_term and the first three characters of tree_number: C04 neoplasms, C18 nutritional and metabolic diseases, C19 endocrine diseases, C10 nervous system diseases, F03 mental disorders, C20 immune system diseases, C14 cardiovascular diseases. A trial counts once in each area it touches, so areas overlap. Also give the number of Lilly trials started in each period, and how many of those have no term in any of these areas.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
No-area share is high and driven by missing MeSH data, not by genuinely unrelated trials: of the 583 trials with no area term, 431 have no
mesh-listcondition term at all
The late-stage pipeline
Trial counts overstate a pipeline, because a trial lists comparators and background drugs too. We counted a drug only if it was in an experimental arm, and left out other companies’ approved drugs, more than 50 of them, such as pembrolizumab and trastuzumab deruxtecan.
Twelve drugs FDA has never approved are in active Phase 3 trials:
The numbers
| Drug | Active trials, any phase | Main conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Eloralintide | 18 | Obesity, type 2 diabetes |
| Brenipatide | 13 | Alcohol use disorder, major depressive disorder |
| Retatrutide | 10 | Obesity, cardiovascular disease |
| Olomorasib | 5 | Non-small cell lung cancer, other KRAS-altered tumours |
| Vepugratinib | 3 | Urothelial cancer |
| Sofetabart mipitecan | 2 | Ovarian cancer, lung cancer |
| Lepodisiran | 2 | Cardiovascular disease with elevated Lp(a) |
| Muvalaplin | 1 | Cardiovascular disease with elevated Lp(a) |
| Remternetug | 1 | Alzheimer’s disease |
| Lutetium Lu-177 zadavotide guraxetan | 1 | Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer |
| Tersolisib (LY4064809) | 2 | PIK3CA-altered breast cancer |
| Ixoberogene soroparvovec (ixo-vec) | 3 | Neovascular age-related macular degeneration |
Some trials test more than one drug, so the counts overlap. Eloralintide and macupatide share a master protocol (NCT06143956), for example.
Phase 2. Nine named, never-approved drugs have Phase 2 as their highest active phase: macupatide (4 active trials), zotemtegrast (3), mazdutide, bimagrumab, clazakizumab, eltrekibart, merestinib, nisotirostide and solbinsiran.
Earlier and unnamed. A further 56 LY code numbers in active experimental arms don’t match any substance in FDA’s dictionary: 41 at Phase 1, 2 at Phase 1/2, 11 at Phase 2 and 2 at Phase 3. Those two are lebrikizumab and tersolisib under their codes, so some of the 56 are known drugs, and the true number of undisclosed molecules is lower than it looks.
Approved drugs still being developed. Most of the active work is on drugs already marketed. The drugs with the most active Lilly trials are abemaciclib (18), orforglipron (17), tirzepatide (16), mirikizumab (9), pirtobrutinib (8) and donanemab (7).
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: the never-approved drugs, the codes, and the approved drugs
We asked:
Define Lilly trials as studies in aact whose lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’) has one of exactly these names: ‘Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’, ‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’, ‘Dermira, Inc.’, ‘DICE Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’, ‘Prevail Therapeutics’, ‘Morphic Therapeutic, Inc. (A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company)’, ‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Vaccine Company, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘POINT Biopharma, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Scorpion Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Ajax Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’. Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). In active Lilly trials, take interventions of type DRUG, BIOLOGICAL, GENETIC or COMBINATION_PRODUCT in design groups of type EXPERIMENTAL. Link them to moieties in fda.study_ingredients, following the fda guide’s method for which arm gets a drug. Keep moieties with first_approval_date NULL in fda.ingredients. Give one row per moiety whose highest active phase is Phase 2 or Phase 3: name, highest active phase, number of distinct active trials and the main conditions. Give the number of moieties by highest active phase, including Phase 1 and Phase 1/2. Say which rows are salt forms of the same drug or false positives.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
After merging the salt/duplicate pairs below, the distinct investigational drugs are 11 in Phase 3 and 9 in Phase 2
ClinLit AI also named its false positives, such as abiraterone, which is approved as abiraterone acetate:
abiraterone (G819A456D0) is approved as abiraterone acetate (EM5OCB9YJ6, first approval 2011-04-28)
Those 11 and ixo-vec, a gene therapy that the drug dictionary link doesn’t reach, make the 12 in the table.
We asked:
Define Lilly trials as studies in aact whose lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’) has one of exactly these names: ‘Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’, ‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’, ‘Dermira, Inc.’, ‘DICE Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’, ‘Prevail Therapeutics’, ‘Morphic Therapeutic, Inc. (A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company)’, ‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Vaccine Company, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘POINT Biopharma, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Scorpion Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Ajax Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’. Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). In active Lilly trials, take intervention names in design groups of type EXPERIMENTAL that match LY followed by digits, and that have no row in fda.study_ingredients for that trial and intervention name. Normalise each by removing spaces, hyphens and suffixes such as IV or SC. Check each normalised code against fda.substance_names using fda.normalize_name, and split them into codes that resolve to a known moiety (say which) and codes that resolve to nothing. For codes that resolve to nothing, give the number of distinct codes by highest active phase and list those in Phase 2 or Phase 3 with their conditions.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
The 56 “unresolved” codes are unresolved as codes: several are clearly known drugs whose FDA entry uses a different name
We asked:
Define Lilly trials as studies in aact whose lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’) has one of exactly these names: ‘Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’, ‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’, ‘Dermira, Inc.’, ‘DICE Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’, ‘Prevail Therapeutics’, ‘Morphic Therapeutic, Inc. (A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company)’, ‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Vaccine Company, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘POINT Biopharma, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Scorpion Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Ajax Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’. Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). In active Lilly trials, take drugs in design groups of type EXPERIMENTAL that fda.study_ingredients links to a moiety that has an FDA application with sponsor in (‘LILLY’,‘ELI LILLY AND CO’,‘ELI LILLY CO’,‘LILLY RES LABS’,‘AVID RADIOPHARMS INC’,‘LOXO ONCOL’) through fda.application_ingredients. Give one row per moiety: name, first approval date, highest active phase, number of active trials and the main conditions, sorted by number of active trials.
What is due in the next 12 months
Nineteen active Phase 3 trials have a primary completion date between 8 November 2026 and 8 November 2027. All 19 dates are the sponsor’s estimates, and sponsors often move them.
| Drug | Trials | Largest |
|---|---|---|
| Orforglipron | 8 | NCT06993792, obesity with or without type 2 diabetes, 1,400 participants, August 2027 |
| Tirzepatide | 4 | NCT05556512, morbidity and mortality in obesity, 15,374 participants, October 2027 |
| Retatrutide | 3 | NCT06662383, against tirzepatide in obesity, 800 participants, November 2026 |
| Imlunestrant | 1 | NCT05514054, breast cancer, 8,000 participants, October 2027 |
| Pirtobrutinib | 1 | NCT05254743, against ibrutinib in CLL/SLL, 737 participants, October 2027 |
| Lebrikizumab | 1 | NCT06338995, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, 510 participants, May 2027 |
| Ixo-vec | 1 | NCT06856577, neovascular AMD, 311 participants, December 2026 |
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: the coming readouts
We asked:
Define Lilly trials as studies in aact whose lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’) has one of exactly these names: ‘Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’, ‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’, ‘Dermira, Inc.’, ‘DICE Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’, ‘Prevail Therapeutics’, ‘Morphic Therapeutic, Inc. (A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company)’, ‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Vaccine Company, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘POINT Biopharma, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Scorpion Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Ajax Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’. Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). List active Phase 3 Lilly trials whose primary_completion_date falls between 2026-11-08 and 2027-11-08: NCT ID, drug, condition, enrollment, primary completion date and whether that date is ESTIMATED or ACTUAL. Give the total, then the count by drug. Cap the list at 40 rows, largest enrollment first.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
The incretin portfolio dominates: 15 of the 19 trials are GLP-1/GIP agents
Recent results: retatrutide and orforglipron
Retatrutide. PubMed holds three peer-reviewed Phase 3 reports: TRANSCEND-T2D-1 in The Lancet (PMID 42250575), TRIUMPH-2 in The Lancet (PMID 42810372) and TRIUMPH-1 in NEJM (PMID 42814954). TRIUMPH-3, TRIUMPH-4 and TRANSCEND-T2D-2 are so far company announcements that have not been peer reviewed. In its 23 July 2026 release, Lilly said it plans to file for approval in the first quarter of 2027, and reported a MACE-5 hazard ratio of 0.82 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.22) in TRIUMPH-3, which does not show a significant difference from placebo. TRANSCEND-T2D-2, against semaglutide 2 mg, was announced on 28 October 2026.
Orforglipron. FDA approved Foundayo on 1 April 2026 for weight management in adults with obesity, or with overweight and at least one weight-related condition (approval letter). It is not approved for type 2 diabetes. ATTAIN-1, the obesity trial behind it, is in NEJM (PMID 40960239).
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: retatrutide's results and orforglipron's approval
We asked:
What phase 3 topline results has Lilly announced for retatrutide up to November 2026? Check PubMed first for anything published, then Lilly’s press releases on the web. Give the date and source of each, and say which are company announcements that are not peer reviewed.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
so match the estimand before comparing numbers
We asked:
What was the FDA approval of orforglipron (Foundayo), when was it, and for what indication? Check our FDA data, then give the FDA or Lilly source on the web. Then list any peer-reviewed phase 3 publications of orforglipron in PubMed with PMIDs.
What has changed since August 2024
ClinLit AI keeps every earlier version of a trial record from July 2024, so it can show what moved.
Stopped trials. 27 Lilly trials moved to terminated or withdrawn: 12 in Phase 1, 10 in Phase 2, 1 in Phase 2/3 and 4 in Phase 3. The sponsor’s stated reasons include:
| Trial | Drug and condition | Stated reason |
|---|---|---|
| NCT05516758, Phase 2 | Peresolimab, rheumatoid arthritis | “an unfavourable benefit-risk profile observed in interim data analysis” |
| NCT05123586, Phase 2 | LY3361237, lupus | “terminated due to lack of efficacy” |
| NCT05592275, Phase 2 | LY3540378, heart failure | “low likelihood of study success for this HFpEF patient population” |
| NCT06220669, Phase 2 | LY3541860, multiple sclerosis | “interim analysis data failed to demonstrate the intended treatment effect” |
| NCT07030868, Phase 2 | LY3549492, obesity | “strategic business reasons” |
| NCT04396574, Phase 3 | Lasmiditan, migraine | “strategic business decision” |
Delays. In 58 Phase 3 trials the primary completion date moved later, by a median of 78 days per change. It moved earlier in 47, but an earlier date often means a trial was stopped or an estimate was replaced by the real date, so that isn’t acceleration.
Assets changing hands. Five older pomaglumetad trials in schizophrenia moved from Lilly to Denovo Biopharma in October 2026, for example NCT00520923. Trials from Akouos and Scorpion moved in, as those companies were absorbed.
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: terminations, delays and sponsor changes
We asked:
Define Lilly trials as studies in aact whose lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’) has one of exactly these names: ‘Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’, ‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’, ‘Dermira, Inc.’, ‘DICE Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’, ‘Prevail Therapeutics’, ‘Morphic Therapeutic, Inc. (A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company)’, ‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Vaccine Company, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘POINT Biopharma, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Scorpion Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Ajax Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’. Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). Using aact_history.study_changes (it starts in August 2024), answer three things for Lilly trials. 1) How many changed overall_status to TERMINATED, WITHDRAWN or SUSPENDED since then, by phase, and for the Phase 2 and Phase 3 ones list NCT ID, drug, condition and the why_stopped text, at most 25 rows. 2) For Phase 3 Lilly trials, how many changes to primary_completion_date moved it later and how many earlier, and what was the median shift in days each way? Note any reason an earlier move may not be a real acceleration. 3) Which trials changed lead_sponsor into or out of the Lilly names, excluding changes that are only a rename of the same organisation?
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
So the later-moves (median +78 days) are the more interpretable signal; part of the earlier-move count reflects stopping, correction and estimate-to-actual substitution rather than acceleration.
FDA record and patents
Using ClinLit AI’s approximation of FDA’s novel approvals, Lilly has 18 applications first approved since January 2016. That proxy counts every original BLA, so it includes products FDA wouldn’t call novel, such as Rezvoglar, a biosimilar, and Lyumjev, a new formulation of insulin lispro. It also credits the current holder, so Retevmo and Tauvid count for Lilly through Loxo and Avid.
The most recent are Kisunla (donanemab, July 2024), Ebglyss (lebrikizumab, September 2024), Inluriyo (imlunestrant, September 2025), Foundayo (orforglipron, April 2026) and Onswik (insulin efsitora alfa, September 2026).
Patents. The latest patent listed in the Orange Book expires in 2041 for Mounjaro (December) and Jaypirca, 2039 for Zepbound, Inluriyo and Retevmo, 2037 for Foundayo, 2032 for Olumiant and 2031 for Verzenio. Of Lilly’s 11 marketed NDAs with listed patents, only Amyvid’s last patent runs out within three years. A listed expiry isn’t the date generic competition begins: patents can be challenged, settled or delisted.
The blind spot. FDA’s Orange Book covers NDAs. None of Lilly’s 21 marketed BLAs, among them Trulicity, Taltz, Humalog, Omvoh, Ebglyss and Kisunla, has patent or exclusivity data here, so biologic loss of exclusivity can’t be assessed from this data.
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: approvals and patents
We asked:
Lilly’s FDA applications are fda.applications with sponsor in (‘LILLY’,‘ELI LILLY AND CO’,‘ELI LILLY CO’,‘LILLY RES LABS’,‘AVID RADIOPHARMS INC’,‘IMCLONE’,‘LOXO ONCOL’). Using is_novel as the proxy for novel approvals, list Lilly’s novel approvals with first_approval_date since 2016-01-01: application, brand, ingredient, approval date, application type and orig_review_priority, and give the count by year. Then, for Lilly’s currently marketed NDAs, give the latest patent expiry and latest exclusivity expiry per application from fda.patents and fda.exclusivities, sorted by latest patent expiry. Then say how many currently marketed Lilly BLAs there are and whether fda.patents covers them.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
That is a coverage gap, not evidence that these biologics have no IP
How Lilly compares with its peers
We compared four large companies with broad clinical programmes. Each row counts the company and the subsidiaries that register under their own names.
How they run their trials:
| Company | Lead-sponsored trials | Terminated or withdrawn, started since 2016 | Median Phase 3 enrollment | Median Phase 3 sites | FDA novel applications since 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AstraZeneca | 2,835 | 10.3% | 413 | 110 | 17 |
| Eli Lilly | 2,012 | 8.3% | 546 | 83 | 18 |
| Merck & Co. | 2,177 | 10.1% | 672 | 95 | 15 |
| Pfizer | 3,054 | 19.2% | 541 | 60 | 22 |
| Novo Nordisk | 960 | 3.3% | 476 | 85.5 | 8 |
Trials started since 2021, by disease area (areas overlap):
The numbers
| Company | Cancer | Metabolic | Endocrine | Nervous system | Immune | Cardiovascular |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AstraZeneca | 177 | 73 | 44 | 25 | 109 | 46 |
| Eli Lilly | 52 | 172 | 84 | 45 | 47 | 25 |
| Merck & Co. | 160 | 14 | 13 | 17 | 40 | 11 |
| Pfizer | 110 | 41 | 37 | 30 | 44 | 18 |
| Novo Nordisk | 1 | 174 | 85 | 4 | 11 | 16 |
Lilly and Novo Nordisk start almost the same number of metabolic trials (172 and 174), but Lilly also runs cancer, neuroscience and immunology programmes, where Novo Nordisk has little. The other three lead with cancer.
Where trials run has also changed. Every company now has a China site in a larger share of its Phase 3 trials:
The numbers
| Company | Phase 3 with a China site, started 2016–2020 | Started 2021 onward |
|---|---|---|
| AstraZeneca | 38.4% | 69.4% |
| Eli Lilly | 31.5% | 47.0% |
| Merck & Co. | 37.1% | 47.2% |
| Pfizer | 27.9% | 37.0% |
| Novo Nordisk | 19.0% | 30.9% |
Don’t read too much into the termination rates. Sponsors differ in how they record stopped trials, and we haven’t looked into why Pfizer’s is higher.
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: peer tables
We asked:
Define each company’s trials by lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’, agency_class = ‘INDUSTRY’) and name as follows. Lilly: name in (‘Eli Lilly and Company’,‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’,‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’,‘Dermira, Inc.’,‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’,‘Prevail Therapeutics’,‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’,‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’,‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’) or name ~* ‘wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly’. Novo Nordisk: name ~* ‘Novo Nordisk’. AstraZeneca: name ~* ‘^(AstraZeneca|MedImmune|Alexion Pharmaceuticals|Acerta Pharma)’. Pfizer: name = ‘Pfizer’ or name = ‘Seagen Inc.’ or name ~* ‘wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer’ (this leaves out ‘Pfizer’‘s Upjohn has merged with Mylan to form Viatris Inc.’). Merck & Co.: name ~* ‘^Merck Sharp’ or name ~* ‘subsidiary of Merck (Sharp|& Co)’ (this leaves out Merck KGaA). Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). Make one table with a row per company: all lead-sponsored trials; active trials; active Phase 3 (phase = ‘PHASE3’); active Phase 3 with primary_completion_date between 2026-11-08 and 2027-11-08; trials started since 2016-01-01; of those, the percent with overall_status TERMINATED or WITHDRAWN; for Phase 3 trials started since 2016, median enrollment and median number_of_facilities from calculated_values. Note what each definition may miss.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
The termination rate only sees current registry status
We asked:
In fda.applications, match the sponsor column as follows. Lilly: sponsor ~* ‘lilly|^avid radio|^imclone|^loxo’. Novo Nordisk: sponsor ~* ‘^novo( |$)’. AstraZeneca: sponsor ~* ‘astrazeneca|medimmune|alexion’. Pfizer: sponsor ~* ‘pfizer|wyeth|seagen’. Merck & Co.: sponsor ~* ‘^(merck|msd)’ and sponsor !~* ‘kgaa’. Using is_novel as the proxy for novel approvals, give one table with a row per company: novel approvals with first_approval_date since 2016-01-01, of which BLAs, of which in 2021 or later; currently marketed NDAs that have patents in fda.patents; of those, how many have their latest-expiring patent between 2026-11-08 and 2029-11-08; and currently marketed BLAs. Note that the sponsor column is the current holder and what that does to these counts.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
Acquired portfolios are pulled into the acquirer’s row.
We asked:
Define each company’s trials by lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’, agency_class = ‘INDUSTRY’) and name as follows. Lilly: name in (‘Eli Lilly and Company’,‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’,‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’,‘Dermira, Inc.’,‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’,‘Prevail Therapeutics’,‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’,‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’,‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’) or name ~* ‘wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly’. Novo Nordisk: name ~* ‘Novo Nordisk’. AstraZeneca: name ~* ‘^(AstraZeneca|MedImmune|Alexion Pharmaceuticals|Acerta Pharma)’. Pfizer: name = ‘Pfizer’ or name = ‘Seagen Inc.’ or name ~* ‘wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer’ (this leaves out ‘Pfizer’‘s Upjohn has merged with Mylan to form Viatris Inc.’). Merck & Co.: name ~* ‘^Merck Sharp’ or name ~* ‘subsidiary of Merck (Sharp|& Co)’ (this leaves out Merck KGaA). Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). For trials started in 2016-2020 and from 2021 onward, make a table with a row per company and period: number of Phase 3 trials; percent with at least one site in China; percent with at least one site in the United States (aact.countries, excluding rows with removed = true). Then for trials started since 2021-01-01, give each company’s count of trials in these areas from the trial’s own MeSH condition terms (browse_conditions with mesh_type = ‘mesh-list’ joined to mesh_terms on downcase_mesh_term, first three characters of tree_number): C04 neoplasms, C18 nutritional and metabolic, C19 endocrine, C10 nervous system, C20 immune system, C14 cardiovascular. A trial counts once in each area it touches.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
ClinLit AI labelled the last column of its area table “All trials started 2021+”. Those numbers are the trials in at least one of the six areas (284 for Lilly, of 506 started), so we left that column out.
Science and publications
Of Lilly’s 2,012 trials, 661 (33%) have at least one linked PubMed article. Among Phase 3 trials with a primary completion date from 2016 to 2024, it is 125 of 150 (83%). PubMed’s chemical tags from 2019 onward count 895 articles for tirzepatide, 63 for donanemab, 44 for mirikizumab, 37 for orforglipron, 32 for retatrutide and 2 for imlunestrant. The newest drugs are undercounted, because the tags lag publication.
This is the thinnest part of the profile. We have no structured data on drug targets or mechanisms for most pipeline drugs, and no view of research before it reaches the clinic.
What the protocols show. Two posted protocols show what a registry entry can’t.
TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2, the donanemab trial, changed substantially while it ran. Its one posted protocol records the history. Amendment b (February 2021) turned it into a Phase 3 study, changing the primary analysis from CDR-SB to iADRS in the low-to-medium tau population “to confirm Phase 2 results” (p. 116). Amendment c raised the sample from 1,500 to 1,800, citing “Regulatory feedback” (p. 113). Amendment d added the overall population to the primary endpoint (p. 107). Amendment e moved the primary analysis from a Bayesian disease progression model to a frequentist one (p. 6).
ATTAIN-1, the orforglipron obesity trial, sets two estimands for the same endpoint: a “treatment regimen” estimand, which is primary and counts results regardless of adherence (p. 65), and an “efficacy” estimand, which asks what would happen if participants stayed on treatment (p. 66). It planned for 3,042 participants, with more than 90% power assuming at least a 5-point difference in weight loss and each comparison tested at a two-sided level of 0.016 (p. 120). The registry reports 3,127 enrolled.
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: publications and protocols
We asked:
Define Lilly trials as studies in aact whose lead sponsor (sponsors.lead_or_collaborator = ‘lead’) has one of exactly these names: ‘Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Avid Radiopharmaceuticals’, ‘Loxo Oncology, Inc.’, ‘Dermira, Inc.’, ‘DICE Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.’, ‘Prevail Therapeutics’, ‘Morphic Therapeutic, Inc. (A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company)’, ‘Verve Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Vaccine Company, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘POINT Biopharma, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Scorpion Therapeutics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘Ajax Therapeutics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company’, ‘SiteOne Therapeutics, Inc.’, ‘Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc.’. Active means overall_status in (‘RECRUITING’,‘NOT_YET_RECRUITING’,‘ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING’,‘ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION’). How many Lilly trials have at least one linked PubMed article, counting links from pubmed.article_databank_accessions (accession_number = nct_id) and aact.study_references (PMIDs that exist in pubmed.articles)? Give the total, as a share of all Lilly trials, and for Phase 3 Lilly trials with a primary completion date between 2016 and 2024 only. Then count PubMed articles per year for 2019 to 2026, tagged in pubmed.chemicals with each of tirzepatide, orforglipron, retatrutide, donanemab, mirikizumab and imlunestrant, checking the names against pubmed.substances first. Say what these counts can miss, including for the current year.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
so this measures “has a linked paper”, not “has a results paper”.
We asked:
In TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2, the phase 3 trial of donanemab in early Alzheimer’s disease (NCT04437511), how did the primary endpoint, the study population and the sample size change between protocol amendments, and what reasons does the protocol give? Cite the protocol pages.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
When we opened the cited pages, two page numbers were one too low: the amendment c and d passages are on PDF pages 113 and 107, not 112 and 106. The pages above are the corrected ones.
We asked:
Which documents has the phase 3 orforglipron obesity trial ATTAIN-1 (NCT05869903) posted? If a protocol is posted, what are its primary endpoints and estimands, and how did it choose its sample size? Cite the protocol pages.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
ClinLit AI gave the significance level as 0.017. The protocol’s page 120 says 0.016, so we used that.
Safety signals to watch
These are reports to FAERS, FDA’s adverse event database, for seven Lilly drugs. Our FAERS data holds only serious reports received from July 2016 to June 2026.
| Drug | US boxed warning | Serious reports | Reports recording a death |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tirzepatide | Yes: thyroid C-cell tumours | 25,839 | 792 |
| Baricitinib | Yes: serious infections, mortality, malignancy, cardiovascular events, thrombosis | 5,768 | 742 |
| Donanemab | Yes: amyloid-related imaging abnormalities | 1,354 | 64 |
| Selpercatinib | No | 971 | 183 |
| Pirtobrutinib | No | 508 | 181 |
| Mirikizumab | No | 447 | 29 |
| Lebrikizumab | No | 281 | 10 |
These figures can’t be compared between drugs. FAERS has no count of how many people took each drug, no check that a drug caused an event, and depends on who chooses to report. Reports of death in cancer drugs such as selpercatinib and pirtobrutinib often reflect the disease being treated.
Reproduce this with ClinLit AI: labels and FAERS
We asked:
For tirzepatide, donanemab, baricitinib, mirikizumab, lebrikizumab, selpercatinib and pirtobrutinib, make a table of: whether the US label has a boxed warning and what it warns of; serious FAERS reports in total (all reports in our FAERS data are serious reports received in the last 10 years); deaths reported; and the three reaction terms with the strongest disproportionality that have at least 50 reports, with PRR and lower confidence limit. Use the words reported and signal for review, never risk, rate or cause, and state what FAERS cannot show.
Ask ClinLit AI this question →
Disproportionality (PRR, ROR) is only a signal for review
How we counted
Which companies count as Lilly. Trials whose lead sponsor is one of 15 exact names: Eli Lilly and Company, and 14 companies it owns that have registered trials, some under their pre-acquisition names. We confirmed the deals from company announcements for Loxo, Dermira, Prevail, Sigilon, Verve and Adverum, and reporting for Avid. For SiteOne, one trial, we found the agreement but only a secondary source for its closing. The registry itself calls DICE, Morphic Therapeutic, POINT, Scorpion, Ajax and Vaccine Company wholly owned subsidiaries. A company’s earlier trials count, even from before Lilly owned it.
What is left out. Trials where Lilly is only a collaborator, Phase 4 and observational studies, and anything not registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Registries in other regions could hold trials we can’t see.
Ownership of drugs. A drug counted as Lilly’s pipeline if it was in an experimental arm of a Lilly-led trial. Partnered drugs count, and a drug licensed from another company may sit in this list. ClinLit AI’s drug links work by name, so a compound known only by a code can be missed.
Cross-check. We ran our own SQL for the headline counts and the never-approved drug list. It matched ClinLit AI’s exactly: 2,012 trials, 240 active, 102 in active Phase 3, 19 due in 12 months, 8.3% terminated or withdrawn, 661 trials with articles, and 14, 9 and 7 entries at Phase 3, Phase 2 and Phase 1 before the corrections described above.
We used ClinLit AI’s numbers, so you can reproduce them by pasting the same questions. The data updates daily, so your counts will differ from these after 7 November 2026.
ClinLit AI can make mistakes: check its answers against the sources it cites. Nothing here is medical, investment or regulatory advice.