A Living Reference · v1.0 · Reviewed September 2026
Thirty-four peptides, each graded by the strongest human evidence that actually exists for it — not by how loudly it is marketed. Search it, filter it, cite it.
What This Is
Every peptide on this page is sorted into one of three evidence tiers — Established, Emerging, or Preclinical — based on the strongest human data that exists for it, not on how loudly it is marketed.
The peptide world has a signal problem. A compound with a decade of large randomized trials and a compound with three papers in mice can look identical in a Reddit thread or a supplement ad. This index exists to make that difference impossible to miss.
It is deliberately blunt. A high tier is not a recommendation, and a low tier is not a dismissal — it is a statement about how much we actually know. Some of the most interesting molecules in science sit in the Preclinical tier precisely because the human work hasn’t been done yet.
The Headline Finding
Of the 34 peptides tracked here, only 6 rest on replicated human trials. The great majority live in the Emerging or Preclinical tiers — which is the single most important thing to understand before trusting any confident claim about a peptide.
The Three Tiers
Replicated human randomized controlled trials. Most are FDA-approved for a specific use.
Some human data — single or small trials, mixed results, or non-Western literature — not yet replicated at scale.
No meaningful human efficacy trials. The evidence is animal, cell, or mechanistic.
Tiers reflect the quantity and quality of evidence, not a judgment of safety, legality, or whether any given person should use a compound. A drug can be Tier A and still be wrong for you; a compound can be Tier C and still be under serious scientific investigation. For the full grading rationale, see how peptides are chosen.
The Index · Search & Filter
Type a name to find a compound, or filter by tier. The full evidence tables are below.
Showing all 34 peptides.
| Compound | Highest human evidence | Regulatory status | The honest read |
|---|---|---|---|
| Semaglutide | Phase 3 RCTs (STEP, SUSTAIN) | FDA-approved (Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus) | The benchmark on this page. Tens of thousands of patients in randomized trials — this is what a mature evidence base actually looks like. |
| Tirzepatide | Phase 3 RCTs (SURMOUNT, SURPASS) | FDA-approved (Mounjaro, Zepbound) | A replicated, well-powered trial program with head-to-head data, not just placebo comparisons. |
| Tesamorelin | Phase 3 RCTs | FDA-approved 2010 (Egrifta) | Approved and RCT-backed for one narrow indication (HIV lipodystrophy). General “anti-aging” use is an extrapolation the trials never tested. |
| PT-141 (Bremelanotide) | Phase 3 RCTs | FDA-approved 2019 (Vyleesi) | Approved for a specific sexual-desire indication in premenopausal women. Broader libido claims run past the label. |
| Oxytocin | Extensive human RCTs | FDA-approved (Pitocin) | A well-established drug — for labor. The trendy “bonding / wellness” nasal uses are not what those trials studied. |
| Sermorelin | Human trials | Formerly FDA-approved (Geref); now compounded | Has a real regulatory and trial history as a GHRH analog. Today’s longevity marketing exceeds that original, narrower evidence. |
| Compound | Highest human evidence | Regulatory status | The honest read |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retatrutide | Large Phase 2 RCT (NEJM 2023); Phase 3 ongoing | Investigational — not FDA-approved | High-quality trial data for weight loss, but still investigational. Impressive ≠ approved. |
| Cagrilintide | Phase 2 RCTs | Investigational | Late-stage trial data, largely as a combination therapy (with semaglutide). Not approved on its own. |
| MK-677 (Ibutamoren) | Multiple human RCTs | Investigational — never approved | It genuinely raises GH/IGF-1 in trials — but a large clinical outcome study failed, and it can raise appetite and blood sugar. Real data, sobering results. |
| SS-31 (Elamipretide) | Phase 2–3 trials | Investigational | Genuine late-stage mitochondrial-disease trials with mixed / negative primary endpoints — which is itself useful information. |
| Cerebrolysin | Numerous human RCTs | Approved in some countries; not FDA-reviewed | Many stroke and dementia trials exist, but methodology and effect sizes are debated and it has not passed FDA review. |
| Thymosin α-1 | Human trials | Approved abroad (Zadaxin); not FDA | Real international human immune-modulation data. Not FDA-reviewed, and not the cure-all it is sometimes sold as. |
| Semax | Human studies (mostly Russian) | Approved in Russia; research elsewhere | Nootropic / neuroprotective data is real but concentrated in Russian literature that Western labs have not widely replicated. |
| Selank | Human studies (mostly Russian) | Approved in Russia; research elsewhere | Same story as Semax — anxiolytic human data exists, but it is hard to independently verify outside Russia. |
| Kisspeptin | Human research trials | Investigational | Well-studied in reproductive-medicine research settings. Consumer use runs far ahead of what that research supports. |
| NAD+ | Human trials of precursors (NR, NMN) | Supplement / research | Most human data is for oral precursors — not injected or IV NAD, which is far less studied than the marketing implies. |
| Ipamorelin | Small human GH studies | Research only | A selective GH secretagogue with short human studies. No outcome data on body composition or longevity. |
| CJC-1295 | Small human PK studies | Research only | Raises GH/IGF-1 in small studies. No long-term outcome trials — the safety runway is short. |
| GHK-Cu | Human topical / cosmetic studies | Cosmetic ingredient; injectable is research only | Reasonable human evidence as a topical skin peptide. Systemic or injected use is essentially unstudied in humans. |
| AOD-9604 | Human RCTs (obesity) | Investigational — failed endpoints | A rare case where the human data is the caution: trials did not beat placebo for fat loss. |
| ARA-290 (Cibinetide) | Phase 2 RCTs | Investigational | Genuine Phase 2 data in neuropathy and sarcoidosis — promising, but not yet replicated at scale. |
| VIP | Small human / research studies | Investigational (e.g. aviptadil studied) | An endogenous peptide studied in specific conditions. Consumer nasal use runs ahead of the evidence. |
| Melanotan II | Limited human data | Not approved; safety warnings issued | The peptide whose strongest “evidence” is its adverse-event reports. Documented human use is largely a record of its risks. |
| Compound | Highest human evidence | Regulatory status | The honest read |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPC-157 | Animal studies only | Research only | One of the most-hyped peptides with one of the thinnest human evidence bases. Nearly all data is rodent. |
| TB-500 (Thymosin β4) | Animal studies | Research only | A popular “healing” peptide whose evidence is almost entirely animal wound-healing work. |
| MOTS-c | Animal / mechanistic | Research only | Exercise-mimetic interest comes from mouse and cell work. No human trials. |
| Humanin | Animal / cell | Research only | A mitochondrial-derived peptide of real scientific interest — and zero human efficacy trials. |
| Dihexa | Animal studies | Research only | Striking rodent synaptogenesis data drives the nootropic hype. There are no human trials behind it. |
| 5-Amino-1MQ | Animal / cell | Research only | An NNMT inhibitor whose weight-loss interest is entirely rodent and cell-culture — no human efficacy data. |
| KPV | Animal / cell | Research only | An anti-inflammatory α-MSH fragment. The data is preclinical. |
| LL-37 | Research-stage | Research only | A human antimicrobial peptide studied in the lab — not a validated therapeutic for consumer use. |
| DSIP | Sparse, decades-old human / animal | Research only | Delta-sleep peptide with old, hard-to-replicate human reports. Effectively preclinical by today’s standards. |
| Epithalon | Small, older studies | Research only | Longevity claims rest on small, older, mostly single-group studies not replicated by independent labs. |
| Pinealon | Small, older studies | Research only | A short “peptide bioregulator” whose evidence is limited older work, not independently replicated. |
Read This Before You Cite It
Three things this page is careful not to do:
It does not recommend anything. PeptideReport.ai sells no products and prescribes nothing. A Tier A grade is a description of a trial record, not a prompt to go acquire the molecule.
It does not equate “established” with “safe for everyone.” Semaglutide has a huge evidence base and a real side-effect profile. Evidence strength and personal suitability are different axes.
It does not treat regulatory status as evidence quality. Some compounds are approved abroad but thinly studied; some are investigational but rigorously trialed. That is why evidence and regulatory status are shown in separate columns.
Why It Can Be Trusted
Grades here are not vibes. Each compound is run through the same question set: Is there human RCT evidence? Is it replicated? Is it approved anywhere, and for what? What does the strongest study actually show — and what did it fail to show? The answers place it in a tier before any narrative is written.
That is the whole point of a fixed standard: a molecule a clinician personally finds exciting and one they are skeptical of get graded by the identical yardstick. Enthusiasm doesn’t bump a compound up a tier, and unfamiliarity doesn’t push one down.
The Highest human evidence column names the strongest study type on record — and, where a landmark trial program or approval defines it (STEP, SURMOUNT, Egrifta, Vyleesi), names that too, so the grade can be checked against the primary source rather than taken on faith.
Version & Changelog
Tiers move as the science does. When a Preclinical compound earns its first solid human trial, it moves up; when an Emerging compound is approved or fails Phase 3, its row changes. Every revision is logged here so the “living” claim can be audited, not just asserted.
| Version | Reviewed | What changed |
|---|---|---|
| v1.0 | Sep 21, 2026 | Initial publication — 34 peptides graded across three evidence tiers, with regulatory status and a clinician note for each. |
Next scheduled review tracks major readouts — including Phase 3 results for retatrutide and cagrilintide, which could move rows in the Emerging tier.
Cite This Index
Referencing the Peptide Evidence Index in an article, a protocol, or a patient handout? Copy the citation below. Using the same canonical link and review date keeps every reference pointing at the current, maintained version.
DelBoccio, S. (2026). The Peptide Evidence Index (v1.0). PeptideReport.ai. https://peptidereport.ai/research/evidence-index/ (Reviewed September 21, 2026).
Common Questions
About the Author
Full Disclaimer