Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Goal: 1,000 supporters
Loading...

Which pharmaceutical company sponsors Neurocept clinical trials and where are they registered?

Checked on November 24, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important info or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Available reporting does not identify a major pharmaceutical company sponsoring clinical trials for a product called “Neurocept”; most found material presents Neurocept as a dietary supplement or consumer product rather than an investigational drug in pharma‑led clinical trials [1] [2] [3]. Company registry records show a UK company named NEUROCEPT LIMITED with a Birmingham address, and multiple commercial Neurocept websites and reviews exist — but none of the supplied sources list formal clinical‑trial registrations or a pharmaceutical sponsor on clinicaltrials.gov or similar registries [4] [5] [1] [2] [3].

1. What the available documents call “Neurocept”: consumer supplement, not a pharma trial drug

Most of the pages returned describe Neurocept as a brain‑health dietary supplement sold via consumer websites and accompanied by marketing materials and customer reviews, not as an investigational new drug backed by a pharmaceutical sponsor running registered clinical trials [1] [3] [2]. Press releases and commercial sites promote product benefits and purchase channels rather than trial protocols or sponsor disclosures [6] [1] [3].

2. Company records: a UK-registered NEUROCEPT LIMITED exists

Companies House records show an entity named NEUROCEPT LIMITED with a registered office at Trafalgar House, 261 Alcester Road South, Kings Heath, Birmingham, West Midlands, England B14 6DT — the filing history and company overview are available on the UK government site [4] [5]. These records establish a corporate identity, but Companies House entries do not, by themselves, indicate pharmaceutical development activity or clinical trial sponsorship.

3. No evidence in provided sources of pharmaceutical sponsorship or registered clinical trials

The supplied literature on clinical trials and trial registration (for example, the Alzheimer’s pipeline overview that notes clinical trials must be registered on clinicaltrials.gov when certain conditions apply) establishes where bona fide drug trials are usually recorded, but none of the provided Neurocept pages cite clinicaltrials.gov identifiers or list a pharmaceutical sponsor for Neurocept trials [7]. In short: available sources do not mention a pharmaceutical company sponsoring Neurocept clinical trials nor do they present registry numbers.

4. Conflicting signals: marketing copy, reviews and commercial claims

Commercial sites claim Neurocept is produced in FDA‑registered facilities and make product guarantees, while consumer reviews on platforms such as Trustpilot allege poor experiences and even label the product a “scam” or note multiple distributors and affiliates [3] [2]. These competing narratives — manufacturer marketing vs. critical customer feedback — raise questions about product transparency and distribution but are not the same as evidence of clinical trial sponsorship [3] [2].

5. Where clinical trials would be expected to appear if they existed

Authoritative guidance cited in the sources explains that trials with U.S. sites, IND oversight, or U.S.‑manufactured drugs are typically registered on clinicaltrials.gov; academic pipeline reviews rely on that registry to track sponsors and trial design [7]. Because none of the neurocept commercial materials or the Companies House filings point to registry entries, the appropriate next step for verification would be searching clinicaltrials.gov or contacting the named company for protocol identifiers — actions not documented in the supplied sources [7] [4].

6. Alternative possibilities and why they matter

Two plausible explanations fit the available evidence: (a) Neurocept is a marketed dietary supplement with marketing and distribution channels but no formal pharma‑sponsored clinical trials, or (b) if any trials exist, they are not publicly registered or not captured in the provided material. The first scenario aligns with the commercial websites and consumer reviews; the second cannot be confirmed or rejected based on the supplied sources [1] [3] [2].

7. How to verify further (what the sources imply you should do next)

The sources suggest concrete verification steps: check clinicaltrials.gov and other national registries for a “Neurocept” trial record or sponsor name (the Alzheimer’s pipeline paper underscores the importance of registry entries for transparency) and query Companies House filings or the company’s listed contact channels for any declared clinical programs [7] [4] [5]. Absent registry identifiers in public reporting, demand for protocol IDs and sponsor disclosures is standard journalistic and regulatory practice [7].

Limitations: this analysis uses only the supplied search results. If you want, I can (a) search clinicaltrials.gov and other registries for Neurocept trial identifiers and sponsor names, or (b) draft email questions to NEUROCEPT LIMITED asking whether any clinical trials exist and, if so, for registry numbers.

Want to dive deeper?
Which pharmaceutical companies have sponsored Neurocept clinical trials historically and currently?
Where are Neurocept clinical trials registered (ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials Register, WHO ICTRP)?
What conflicts of interest are disclosed in Neurocept trial publications and sponsorship statements?
How do Neurocept trial locations (countries, institutions) affect regulatory oversight and patient access?
What are the primary outcomes and sponsors listed for Neurocept trials in registered study records?