Pulmonary fibrosis is scarring of the lung tissue that makes breathing progressively harder. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), the most common form, affects about 100,000 people in the US. Two antifibrotic drugs, nintedanib and pirfenidone, slow disease progression by roughly half but don't stop it, and many people eventually need lung transplant.
What's actually going on in research
Trials are testing drugs that target different scarring pathways, combination therapies pairing existing antifibrotics with new agents, and treatments for non-IPF forms of pulmonary fibrosis. Researchers are also studying whether drugs used in other scarring diseases might work in the lungs, and whether earlier treatment in mild disease changes outcomes.
Combination therapies
Studies are testing whether adding a second drug to nintedanib or pirfenidone can slow scarring more than either drug alone. Early results suggest some combinations are safe and may offer added benefit.
Progressive fibrosing ILD
Trials are extending antifibrotic treatment to people with other forms of lung scarring that behave like IPF. Nintedanib is already approved for this group based on trial results.
New antifibrotic pathways
Drugs targeting different scarring mechanisms than current treatments are in testing. These include agents that block specific proteins involved in lung scarring or promote scar breakdown.
What to know before you search
Eligibility typically depends on pulmonary fibrosis type, lung function test results, time since diagnosis, and whether you're already taking antifibrotic medication.
What types of trials are currently open
- Treatment trials — Testing new antifibrotic drugs or combinations against current standard treatments to see if they slow lung function decline more effectively.
- Early intervention trials — Studying whether treating people with mild pulmonary fibrosis changes the course of disease compared to waiting until symptoms worsen.
- Progressive fibrosing ILD trials — Testing treatments in people with non-IPF forms of lung scarring that are getting worse despite treatment.
- Symptom management trials — Testing treatments for cough, breathlessness, and other symptoms that affect quality of life in pulmonary fibrosis.
- Biomarker studies — Following people with pulmonary fibrosis to identify blood or imaging markers that predict disease progression or treatment response.
Recently added Pulmonary Fibrosis trials
Autogenic Drainage Versus Mechanical Percussion in Children With Cystic Fibrosis
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the effects of autogenic drainage and mechanical percussion on lung function, dyspnea, and quality of life in children with cystic fibrosis. The main questions it aims to answer are: * Does autogenic drainage improve lung function more effectively than mechanical percussion in children with cystic fibrosis? * Does autogenic drainage reduce dyspnea (breathlessness) more effectively than mechanical percussion? * Does autogenic drainage improve health-related quality of life more effectively than mechanical percussion? Researchers will compare autogenic drainage with mechanical percussion to determine which airway clearance technique provides greater benefits for children with cystic fibrosis. Participants will: * Be randomly assigned to receive either autogenic drainage or mechanical percussion therapy. * Participate in supervised treatment sessions five times per week for six weeks. * Undergo assessments of lung function using spirometry (FEV₁ and FVC), dyspnea using the Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale, and quality of life using the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) before and after the intervention period. The findings of this study may help identify the most effective airway clearance technique for improving respiratory health and quality of life in children with cystic fibrosis.
Finger Versus Earlobe Pulse Oximetry During the 6-Minute Walk Test in Interstitial Lung Disease
The OXISITE-ILD study is a prospective, multicenter, observational study designed to evaluate the agreement between finger (digital) and earlobe (auricular) pulse oximetry for measuring oxygen saturation (SpO2) during the six-minute walk test (6MWT) in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD). In routine clinical practice, exercise SpO2 is usually measured at the finger; however, the finger reading can be unreliable in some patients, and there is currently no recommendation on the best sensor location in ILD. This study compares the two sensor locations, recorded at the same time, and evaluates whether any disagreement changes how exercise desaturation is classified and whether ambulatory oxygen is indicated. All patients undergoing a 6MWT as part of routine ILD care are included consecutively to ensure a pragmatic, real-world representation of the ILD population. The primary objective is to measure the agreement between the two locations in the lowest SpO2 reached during the test, including the size and direction of any difference. Secondary objectives include the reclassification of patients at the clinical desaturation thresholds, the comparison between autoimmune and non-autoimmune ILD, the rate of invalid readings at each location, and the clinical, vascular and functional factors associated with disagreement.
Find Pulmonary Fibrosis trials matched specifically to you
Answer 3 quick questions and we'll show you trials that fit your situation.