Latest studies
Every paper our editors flag with a plain-language note and an evidence rating. Filter by evidence, species, or design to find what actually applies to you.
- Study · SermorelinWeak / none
A new era of doping? Use of peptide and peptide-analog drugs in recreational and professional sport and bodybuilding: a critical review.
A critical narrative review examining peptide and peptide-analogue use as performance enhancers across sport, including several growth-hormone secretagogues, ipamorelin, CJC-1295, sermorelin, and fragments such as Frag 176-191 and KPV. This is a synthesis and commentary paper, not primary data, so its role is to characterise a landscape and its risks rather than to quantify them. The authors' central point aligns with the wider evidence: clinical support for these peptides in sport is limited, because most published studies examine controlled therapeutic dosing, not the supraphysiological, stacked protocols common in bodybuilding. They flagged emerging risk signals, cardiovascular strain, insulin resistance, dyslipidaemia and psychiatric instability, and stressed that an unregulated supply chain compounds danger through mislabelled or contaminated product. True prevalence, especially among recreational and younger users, is unknown. Weight this as risk framing rather than an efficacy assessment: the review concludes these remain experimental substances with poorly defined long-term risks that should be considered high-risk in competitive and recreational settings alike.
The Journal of sports medicine and physical fitnessn=——Jul 1, 2026 - Study · SS-31Weak / none
Safety and Efficacy of Approved and Unapproved Peptide Therapies for Musculoskeletal Injuries and Athletic Performance.
This narrative review in Sports Medicine surveys the pharmacological profiles, regulatory standing, and safety data for eleven peptides marketed to athletes and patients seeking injury recovery — ranging from FDA-approved tesamorelin to unapproved compounds such as BPC-157, TB-500, and MOTS-c. The authors' central finding is that a substantial regulatory gap exists: while some peptides (tesamorelin, sermorelin historically) have cleared rigorous approval processes for specific indications, many others circulate in a gray market supported primarily by animal-model data and amplified by social media. A narrative review design is worth flagging. Unlike a systematic review or meta-analysis, it does not involve exhaustive literature search protocols or pooled effect-size estimates, which means it reflects editorial judgment about which evidence to emphasise. That is appropriate for a broad landscape survey but limits the precision of any efficacy conclusions. The key caveat — which the authors acknowledge directly — is that favorable preclinical signals in rodent tissue-repair and metabolic models do not reliably translate to human outcomes. The review also raises an...
Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)n=——Apr 12, 2026 - Study · TesamorelinWeak / none
Analysis of growth hormone releasing hormone and its analogs in urine using nano liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole/orbitrap mass spectrometry.
This is an analytical-chemistry paper, not a study of what these peptides do in the body. The researchers developed and validated a laboratory method (nano-liquid chromatography with high-resolution mass spectrometry) to detect GHRH analogues, sermorelin/CJC-1293, tesamorelin, and CJC-1295, plus a sermorelin metabolite in urine, meeting World Anti-Doping Agency requirements. The work's value is forensic: these peptides are prohibited in sport and are hard to catch because they are unstable, cleared quickly, and present at very low urinary concentrations, which this method addresses (detection limits of 0.5 ng/mL or less). For readers, the relevant takeaways are contextual rather than clinical: these compounds are banned in competition and are now detectable in anti-doping testing. The paper reports nothing about efficacy, safety, or dosing of Tesamorelin, Sermorelin, or CJC-1295, and should not be read as evidence of benefit or harm.
Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysisn=——Jan 15, 2026 - Study · AOD-9604Weak / none
The emerging landscape of performance-enhancing peptides modulating GH-IGF1 axis: bridging the gap between clinical evidence and patient self-administration.
This narrative review is directly on-topic for several tracked peptides. It maps the performance-enhancing GH-IGF-1 axis compounds sold as research chemicals, including the GHRH analogues sermorelin, tesamorelin, and CJC-1295 (with and without DAC), and the growth-hormone secretagogues GHRP-6, hexarelin, and ipamorelin. Its central contribution is an evidence-tiering: the authors contrast peer-reviewed pharmacology and clinical data against the online self-administration protocols people actually use, stratifying agents from regulatory-grade trial evidence down to a complete absence of human studies, and they are explicit that performance and body-recomposition benefits remain unproven. They also catalogue reported adverse effects, including prolactin and cortisol elevations, fluid retention, joint and muscle symptoms, and injection-site reactions. As a review it introduces no new data, but for readers weighing these secretagogues it is a sober, caveat-forward map of how thin the human evidence is and what risks have been reported.
Frontiers in endocrinologyn=——Jan 1, 2026 - Study · DSIPWeak / none
Therapeutic Peptides in Orthopaedics: Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.
This narrative review, published in the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons: Global Research & Reviews, surveys the mechanistic rationale for using therapeutic peptides — including BPC-157, TB-500, GHK-Cu, ipamorelin, CJC-1295, tesamorelin, sermorelin, semax, selank, and epitalon — in orthopaedic and musculoskeletal contexts. As a narrative review, it synthesises existing literature rather than generating new data; it carries no experimental controls, no patient cohort, and no statistical analysis of outcomes. Readers should weight it as an expert-curated overview, not as clinical evidence. The review's own authors acknowledge the central limitation plainly: preclinical findings are promising, but clinical trials are currently lacking. That candid admission matters. For most peptides covered — BPC-157, TB-500, ipamorelin, and epitalon in particular — the mechanistic picture is built almost entirely on rodent and in-vitro models. Tesamorelin is the notable exception, carrying FDA approval for HIV-associated lipodystrophy on the basis of Phase III RCT data, though that evidence does not transfer to orthopaedic applications. The review is useful as a...
Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviewsn=——Jan 1, 2026