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 · KisspeptinWeak / none
Rapid and harmonized analytical workflow for the determination of peptidic and non-peptidic doping agents in dried and liquid blood matrices.
This study is not a clinical or pharmacological investigation — it is a doping-control analytical methods paper, and should be read as such. Researchers developed and validated a streamlined workflow capable of detecting 54 prohibited substances, including BPC-157 and TB-500, across dried blood spots, serum, and plasma using a single microextraction step followed by liquid chromatography coupled with high-resolution mass spectrometry. The analytical performance was satisfactory by laboratory standards: detection limits ranged from 0.05–1.25 ng/mL, no carry-over was observed, and matrix effects were modest (5–33%). Notably, dried blood spot matrices preserved all compounds for the full study duration under non-refrigerated conditions — a meaningful practical advantage for anti-doping sample logistics. For readers tracking BPC-157 and TB-500 specifically: the stability data are striking. Both peptides showed complete degradation in serum within one week at room temperature or refrigerator temperature — a finding with direct implications for detection windows in anti-doping contexts. Dried matrices retained detectability throughout. This paper contributes nothing to the...
The Analystn=——Jun 22, 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 · 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