PTI / Peptide Therapy Index

Research Index

Clinical and preclinical peptide therapy research — indexed by study type, assessed for evidence quality. Independent. No affiliates.

6 recent entries Full index →
Preclinical Research Preclinical
Does the FDA's 2026 Compounding Crackdown on BPC-157, TB-500, MOTS-C, GHK-Cu, and Semax Reflect Clinical Evidence or Regulatory Process?

The FDA's 2026 PCAC actions against BPC-157, TB-500, MOTS-C, GHK-Cu, and Semax reflect regulatory process — not clinical validation or invalidation. All five compounds were evaluated under the 503A Bulks List framework, which requires human safety and efficacy data that none of them possesses. The regulatory outcome maps to an evidence gap, not a clinical verdict.

August 3, 2026 · 11 min read
Rct Evidence Research
What Do 2026 Primary Studies Show About GLP-1/GIP Dual Agonists Versus GLP-1 Monotherapy for Body-Weight Loss and Cardiometabolic Outcomes?

The 2025 SURMOUNT-5 RCT established that tirzepatide produced approximately 20% mean body-weight reduction versus approximately 14% with semaglutide 2.4 mg over 72 weeks. Comparative cardiometabolic data show superior glycaemic control and lipid remodelling with dual agonism. Cardiovascular event data remain largely observational and directionally mixed in 2026.

July 29, 2026 · 11 min read
Preclinical Research Preclinical
Why Does BPC-157's Receptor-Orphan Status Block Rational Analogue Design — and What Does the 2026 Mateescu Review Say About the Clinical Trial Gap?

BPC-157 has no confirmed membrane receptor as of 2026. A 2026 review in Pharmaceutics by Mateescu and colleagues identifies this receptor-orphan status as the root obstacle to rational analogue design. Without a defined pharmacophore, structure–activity relationship studies cannot guide modifications improving half-life, permeability, or potency. Downstream signalling through Egr-1, FAK–paxillin, and VEGFR2 is characterised, but the upstream receptor remains unknown.

July 28, 2026 · 10 min read
Rct Evidence Research
Does Amyloid-β Immunotherapy Meaningfully Alter Cognitive Decline in Early Alzheimer's Disease — What Do the 2026 Trial Readouts Show?

As of 2026, two approved passive immunotherapies — lecanemab and donanemab — demonstrate statistically significant but modest slowing of cognitive decline in early Alzheimer's disease: 27% and 35% respectively on primary clinical scales versus placebo. Effect sizes are real but incremental, confined to amyloid-confirmed early-stage disease, and accompanied by clinically significant ARIA rates that constrain patient selection.

July 27, 2026 · 11 min read
Rct Evidence Research
Why Does DunedinPACE Detect Semaglutide's Anti-Aging Signal When Other Epigenetic Clocks Miss It — What Do the 2026 HIV and SLIM LIVER Trials Reveal?

Two 2025–2026 studies — a 32-week RCT in adults with HIV-associated lipohypertrophy and a 24-week pilot in MASLD patients — both detected semaglutide's anti-aging signal primarily through DunedinPACE, a pace-of-aging clock built from longitudinal physiological data. Its structural design makes it uniquely sensitive to short-duration interventions, explaining a ~9% deceleration where cross-sectional age-estimate clocks showed weaker effects.

July 22, 2026 · 10 min read
Preclinical Research Preclinical
What Did the July 2026 FDA PCAC Review Conclude About BPC-157's Biopharmaceutical Data Gaps and 503A Compounding Eligibility?

At its July 23–24, 2026 meeting, the FDA's Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee (PCAC) recommended against adding BPC-157 to the 503A Bulks List, citing three biopharmaceutical deficiencies: injectable immunogenicity risk, uncharacterised peptide impurity profiles, and an absence of clinical safety data — gaps catalogued independently in the 2026 Pharmaceutics review by Mateescu et al. (doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics18050625).

July 21, 2026 · 9 min read

The Peptide Therapy Index catalogues primary-source research on peptide therapies — clinical trials, preclinical studies, and evidence reviews — assessed for study type and quality. Every entry identifies whether the underlying evidence is from randomised controlled trials, animal models, case series, or review syntheses.

No commercial affiliations. No advertising. No supplements sold. Editorial standards →