Skip to content

CJC-1295

  • Peptide
  • Still being tested
  • Identity checked
  • Sources last checked 2026-09-04

This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.

What CJC-1295 does in the body

The pituitary keeps its natural pulsing rhythm; what rises is the level between pulses.

Growth hormone-releasing hormone is the signal the brain sends to make the pituitary release growth hormone. The natural version is destroyed within minutes. CJC-1295 is a redesigned version with four amino acid substitutions that block the enzymes that chew it up, plus a chemical hook on the end. That hook reacts with a free sulfur atom on albumin, the most abundant protein in blood, and forms a permanent covalent bond. The drug is now carried around attached to a protein that circulates for weeks, so one injection keeps stimulating the pituitary for days.

Why people take it. An unapproved injection intended to raise growth hormone for about a week.

What happened in people

One injection raised growth hormone for at least six days and a related growth signal for up to eleven.

Reviewed first-read answer

Where this came from

A person wrote this and a reviewer approved it against this exact record. It carries no effect size.

A reviewer approved this against this record. The reviewed-claim record carrying the exact population and effect size does not exist yet.

No source is stored against this line.

The limit that matters most

No human study measured fat, muscle, strength, sleep, recovery or another patient outcome.

Where it acts
GHRH receptors on anterior pituitary somatotrophs; albumin in plasma
Kind of result
The kind of result is not recorded
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. It is a prescription or clinician-administered medicine where it is approved.

What the registries record it as

  • The substance registry classes this as protein.

    FDA substance registry · 62RC32V9N7 · read 2026-08-29

  • Its recorded molecular formula is C165H269N47O46, weighing 3647.2.

    PubChem record · 91971820 · read 2026-08-29

Where each sentence above came from

A person wrote this explanation into the record, with the studies named in the path below.

A reviewer approved this sentence against this exact record and its sources.

The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.

The four opening statements run to 138 words.

Words this page uses

Four words worth knowing first

Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.

Placebo

A placebo is a dummy treatment given so the real one can be compared with it.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A placebo is like a blank control in an experiment.

Where that stops being true. A blank does nothing. People given a placebo often do get better.

What people get wrong. A placebo effect is read as imaginary. The improvement is measured and real.

An inactive intervention matched in appearance to the test intervention, used to control for non-specific effects.

Comparator

A comparator is whatever the treatment was measured against.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

It is like the other runner in a race.

Where that stops being true. A race has one winner. A study can show both arms improved.

What people get wrong. Results are read without asking what the other group got. Beating nothing is not beating a treatment.

The control condition against which the experimental intervention is assessed.

Randomisation

Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.

Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.

What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.

Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.

What happened in peopleRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What happened in people

Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.

Peak concentration and area under the curve of growth hormone and IGF-1, with standard pharmacokinetic parameters for CJC-1295

The study showed what it set out to show

Who was studied
Teichman 2006 ascending-dose phase 1 programme (two trials, 28 and 49 days)
How many people
0
Study design
Phase 1, randomised placebo-controlled double-blind ascending dose
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Growth hormone up 2- to 10-fold for 6 days or more and IGF-1 up 1.5- to 3-fold for 9-11 days after a single dose; half-life 5.8-8.1 days; IGF-1 above baseline up to 28 days after multiple doses
Repeated elsewhere
Partially Replicated

What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No serious adverse reactions reported; the authors singled out 30 and 60 ug/kg as the better tolerated doses, which implies tolerability differences at the higher ones.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; weekly or twice-weekly in the published studies

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

Growth hormone pulse frequency and amplitude, trough and mean growth hormone, and IGF-1, at 60 or 90 ug/kg

The study showed what it set out to show

Who was studied
Ionescu 2006 overnight pulsatility study
How many people
0
Study design
Phase 1 pharmacodynamic, 20-minute sampling over 12 hours before and one week after dosing
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Trough growth hormone up 7.5-fold (P < 0.0001), mean growth hormone up 46% (P < 0.01), IGF-1 up 45% (P < 0.001); pulse frequency and magnitude unaltered; no significant difference between doses
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; weekly or twice-weekly in the published studies

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

Efficacy and safety of CJC-1295 over 12 weeks in HIV-infected patients with visceral obesity

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT00267527 — phase 2 in HIV-associated visceral obesity
How many people
120
Study design
Phase 2, multicentre randomised placebo-controlled double-blind, 12 weeks
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Terminated. Started December 2005, record completion September 2006. No results posted and no reason for termination stated
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; weekly or twice-weekly in the published studies

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

What we know
RNAWiki holds 3 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.

What happened in peopleRead from sources, not yet reviewed

How close this is to real life

The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.

  1. Living longer, or avoiding a major event No evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
  2. What a body can do day to day No evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
  3. Measured performance No evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
  4. Symptoms and quality of life No evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
  5. A number that stands in for health No evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
  6. A step measured inside a person Evidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
  7. Animals No evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.No animal record is stored.
  8. Cells in a dish Evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
  9. A guess from software No evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.

Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.

What it changes in the bodyRead from sources, not yet reviewed

The path through the body

From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.

  1. Start

    CJC-1295

    What a person takes: Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; weekly or twice-weekly in the published studies.

    The measurement behind this step

    A lyophilised peptide reconstituted before injection. The published human dosing was 30, 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram subcutaneously, weekly or biweekly. Outside trials the same presentation is sold as a research chemical, frequently as the shorter non-conjugating peptide under the same product name, with no assurance that the maleimide group that defines the drug is still intact.

  2. Getting in

    Injected under the skin as a free peptide

    It goes in as an ordinary small peptide injection, and the interesting part happens after it reaches the bloodstream.

    Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.

    The measurement behind this step

    Subcutaneous administration; the doses used in the published human studies were 30, 60 and 90 micrograms per kilogram. The four backbone substitutions protect it from dipeptidyl peptidase IV and from the oxidation and deamidation that destroy native GHRH within minutes, keeping it intact long enough to find its target protein.

  3. Reaching the cell

    Welds itself to albumin

    A chemical hook on the end of the peptide reacts with the single free sulfur atom on the most abundant protein in blood, and the bond does not come undone.

    Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.

    The measurement behind this step

    The maleimidopropionyl group on Lys30 undergoes Michael addition to the free thiol of albumin cysteine 34, forming a stable thioether. The peptide now shares albumin pharmacokinetics: a circulating half-life measured in days rather than minutes, and a volume of distribution confined largely to plasma. Measured half-life in humans was 5.8-8.1 days.

  4. What it acts on

    The bound conjugate still activates the receptor

    Even carrying a large protein passenger, the peptide end still fits the pituitary receptor.

    Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.

    The measurement behind this step

    The GHRH pharmacophore is at the N-terminus and the conjugation site is at the C-terminus, so the albumin adduct retains agonist activity at the GHRH receptor on anterior pituitary somatotrophs. Receptor occupancy is now near-continuous rather than pulsatile, which was the design question the second human study was run to answer.

  5. The change it makes

    Trough growth hormone rises; the pulses stay

    The pituitary keeps its natural rhythm. What changes is the baseline between pulses, which rises more than sevenfold.

    Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.

    The measurement behind this step

    Continuous GHRH receptor stimulation raised basal trough growth hormone 7.5-fold (P < 0.0001) with pulse frequency and amplitude unaltered, giving a 46% rise in mean growth hormone. The failure to flatten pulsatility is the pharmacologically interesting result, because pulsatile delivery is thought to matter for many of the hormone downstream effects.

  6. What that does for a person

    IGF-1 rises for over a week, and the story stops there

    Liver IGF-1 goes up by about half and stays up for nine to eleven days. No study has looked at what happens to the body after that.

    Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.

    The measurement behind this step

    IGF-1 rose 45% at one week after a single dose and 1.5- to 3-fold across the ascending-dose programme, remaining above baseline for up to 28 days on repeated dosing. IGF-1 increases did not correlate with any measured parameter of growth hormone secretion. Beyond IGF-1, no human outcome has been measured for this compound: not body composition, not strength, not sleep, not a patient-reported outcome.

No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.

What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Were people like you studied?

RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.

Who was studied

People similar to this profile were included.

  • In trials: healthy adults aged 21-61, and patients with HIV-associated visceral obesity. Outside trials: people injecting it, usually alongside a ghrelin-receptor agonist such as ipamorelin, in the expectation of body composition and recovery effects.

Who is missing from the studies

  • Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.

Where the result stopped carrying

  • The only registered efficacy trial, a phase 2 in HIV-associated visceral obesity, was terminated in 2006 with no posted results and no stated reason
  • No sponsor has registered a trial of CJC-1295 in the twenty years since, in any indication, in any country
  • This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
  • It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.

RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Why it might seem to do nothing

A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.

It was studied in different people

The people in the studies were not much like the reader.

On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.

The evidence may simply be wrong

Small early studies often do not hold up.

On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (11)
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.

None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What taking it involves

The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.

How it is supplied

Still being tested

Quoted from a source

Where this came from

Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.

Read from the recorded approval status.

No source is stored against this line.

Form and route

Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; weekly or twice-weekly in the published studies

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

The form and route recorded on this substance.

No source is stored against this line.

Who oversees it

Professional supervision is normally required. It is a prescription or clinician-administered medicine where it is approved.

Quoted from a source

Where this came from

Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.

The identity record classes it as investigational; no register records an approval.

No source is stored against this line.

What is in the pack

A lyophilised peptide reconstituted before injection. The published human dosing was 30, 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram subcutaneously, weekly or biweekly.

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

Recorded notes on how this is sold. The rest of the recorded wording: Outside trials the same presentation is sold as a research chemical, frequently as the shorter non-conjugating peptide under the same product name, with no assurance that the maleimide group that defines the drug is still intact.

No source is stored against this line.

Where it is registered

Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.

Counted from records

Where this came from

A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.

Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.

No source is stored against this line.

Why people stop

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.

No source is stored against this line.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What can go wrong

Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.

Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page

No serious adverse reactions were reported across the 28-day and 49-day phase 1 studies, and the authors identified 30 and 60 micrograms per kilogram as the better-tolerated doses. Nothing is known beyond 49 days in humans. The expected class effects of sustained growth hormone and IGF-1 elevation — fluid retention, arthralgia and myalgia, carpal tunnel symptoms, insulin resistance — are documented for growth hormone itself rather than measured for this compound, and the theoretical mitogenic concern that attends chronic IGF-1 elevation has never been examined here because no study ran long enough.

Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.

Where this came from

Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.

Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Does the exact form matter?

Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.

The form that was studied

Subcutaneous injection of a reconstituted lyophilised powder; weekly or twice-weekly in the published studies

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

The form used in the studies cited on this page.

No source is stored against this line.

What is sold

The published human dosing was 30, 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram subcutaneously, weekly or biweekly.

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

Recorded notes on which forms are sold. The rest of the recorded wording: Outside trials the same presentation is sold as a research chemical, frequently as the shorter non-conjugating peptide under the same product name, with no assurance that the maleimide group that defines the drug is still intact.

No source is stored against this line.

What is recorded as being sold

  • 13 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 13 of them contain it and nothing else.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 87621-032 · read 2026-08-29

  • They are sold as powder.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 87621-032 · read 2026-08-29

Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.

What it would be like to takeRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What you could measure

This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.

Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine, investigational agent. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.

Questions worth asking

  • Which of the trials of CJC-1295 studied people like me?
  • What was measured, and for how long?
  • Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
  • What would we watch for, and when would we stop?

Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.

RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Claims that go past the evidence

Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.

Goes past the evidence

That raising growth hormone and IGF-1 for a week improves body composition, recovery or sleep — none of which has been measured in any human study of this compound

Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.

The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.

What would change this

A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

Goes past the evidence

That the published kinetics apply to the "without DAC" product sold under the same name, when the albumin conjugation is what produces them

Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.

The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.

What would change this

A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

Goes past the evidence

That the absence of serious adverse reactions in a 49-day phase 1 describes the safety of repeated use over months or years

Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.

The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.

What would change this

A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

Goes past the evidence

That an unlicensed vial contains an intact maleimide; hydrolysis of that group silently converts the drug into a short-acting one

Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.

The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.

What would change this

A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What nobody knows yet

Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.

How much did people take in the studies?

The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.

Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.

What would answer it

A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

How fast does the body clear it?

The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.

Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.

What would answer it

A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Missing populations

Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Missing long-term data

No completed tested study window is recorded.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

No reviewed conclusion

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Missing interaction studies

No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Formulation uncertainty

Several salts, forms or products of CJC-1295 are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

Mechanism not reviewed

No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.

Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.

What would answer it

A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.

Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.

What happened in peopleRead from sources, not yet reviewed

Check any of this yourself

Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.

Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.

One injection raised growth hormone for six days and IGF-1 for nine to eleven
In plain words
In healthy adults, a single subcutaneous injection raised average growth hormone two- to tenfold for six days or more, and IGF-1 by one and a half to three times for nine to eleven days.
What was measured
Peak concentration and area under the curve of growth hormone and IGF-1, and pharmacokinetic half-life, after single and repeated subcutaneous doses
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Teichman et al. ran two randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind ascending-dose trials of 28 and 49 days at two sites in healthy subjects aged 21-61. CJC-1295 or placebo was given subcutaneously as one of four ascending single doses in the first study and as two or three weekly or biweekly doses in the second. After a single injection there were dose-dependent increases in mean plasma growth hormone of 2- to 10-fold lasting six days or more, and in mean plasma IGF-1 of 1.5- to 3-fold lasting nine to eleven days. The estimated half-life was 5.8-8.1 days. After multiple doses mean IGF-1 stayed above baseline for up to 28 days, showing a cumulative effect. No serious adverse reactions were reported, and the authors identified 30 and 60 micrograms per kilogram as the better-tolerated doses.
Source
Teichman SL et al., J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:799-805
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Pulsatility survived; what rose was the trough
In plain words
Overnight sampling every 20 minutes showed that the natural rhythm of growth hormone pulses was unchanged. The level between pulses rose 7.5-fold, and that is what drove IGF-1 up.
What was measured
Growth hormone pulse frequency, pulse amplitude, trough and mean concentrations by 20-minute overnight sampling, with IGF-1
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Ionescu and Frohman sampled blood every 20 minutes across an overnight 12-hour period in healthy men aged 20-40 before and one week after a single injection of 60 or 90 micrograms per kilogram of CJC-1295. Growth hormone secretion increased with pulsatility preserved: the frequency and magnitude of secretory pulses were unaltered. Basal trough growth hormone rose 7.5-fold (P < 0.0001), mean growth hormone rose 46% (P < 0.01) and IGF-1 rose 45% (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two doses. The IGF-1 increases did not correlate with any parameter of growth hormone secretion. This is the study that settled the mechanistic objection to continuous GHRH stimulation — that it would flatten the pulses the hormone depends on — and it settled it in the drug favour.
Source
Ionescu M, Frohman LA, J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:4792-4797
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The only registered efficacy trial was terminated with no results
In plain words
A 120-patient phase 2 in HIV-associated visceral obesity started at the end of 2005, stopped in 2006, and never posted results or a stated reason.
What was measured
Registered clinical trials of CJC-1295 with a clinical efficacy endpoint: one, terminated, unreported
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
NCT00267527 was a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 2 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CJC-1295 administered for 12 weeks in HIV-infected patients with HIV-associated visceral obesity, sponsored by ConjuChem, with a planned enrolment of 120. It began in December 2005 and its record shows a completion date of September 2006 with a status of terminated and no reason given. No results are posted. It is the only registered trial of CJC-1295 for any clinical endpoint anywhere, and it is twenty years old. The phase 1 pharmacology remains the entire human evidence base for this compound.
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT00267527, ConjuChem, status terminated, no results posted and no reason stated
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
What is sold as CJC-1295 is usually not CJC-1295
In plain words
Most vendors sell "CJC-1295 without DAC", which is a different peptide that lasts about half an hour rather than a week. The two are marketed as versions of the same product.
What was measured
That the published CJC-1295 pharmacokinetics describe the "without DAC" product, when the albumin conjugation is the only reason those kinetics exist
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The entire point of CJC-1295 is the drug affinity complex: the C-terminal lysine bearing a maleimidopropionyl group that forms a covalent bond with albumin cysteine 34 and gives the 5.8-8.1 day half-life. Remove it and what remains is modified GRF(1-29), a 29-residue peptide with the same four substitutions but no albumin anchor, whose duration is that of an ordinary short-acting GHRH analogue. Every pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic result quoted on a vendor page — the six-day growth hormone elevation, the eleven-day IGF-1 elevation, the eight-day half-life — was obtained with the conjugating version. Applying them to the non-conjugating version is a category error, and it is the standard framing in which the product is sold.
Source
Teichman SL et al., J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:799-805 for the conjugated compound; Dominikowski A et al., Front Endocrinol 2026;17:1822475, review of GH-IGF1 axis peptides and self-administration practices
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
contested
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Every body composition claim is an inference from IGF-1
In plain words
No trial has measured what CJC-1295 does to fat, muscle, strength, sleep or recovery in a human being.
What was measured
That sustained elevation of growth hormone and IGF-1 by CJC-1295 produces measurable changes in body composition or recovery, which no human study has measured
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The published human endpoints for this compound are plasma growth hormone concentration, plasma IGF-1 concentration, pulse architecture and pharmacokinetic parameters. There is no reported measurement of lean body mass, fat mass, muscle strength, exercise performance, sleep architecture, wound healing or any patient-reported outcome. The reasoning that supports its use — growth hormone rises, IGF-1 rises, therefore body composition improves — skips the step where somebody measures body composition. The one trial that would have measured a clinical endpoint, in HIV-associated visceral obesity, was terminated without reporting.
Source
Complete set of published human studies of CJC-1295: Teichman SL et al., J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:799-805; Ionescu M and Frohman LA, J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:4792-4797; terminated NCT00267527
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
caution
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Detection methods exist, and were written for horses too
In plain words
Confirmation methods for CJC-1295 have been published for human and equine plasma, and it is prohibited in sport at all times.
What was measured
Analytical confirmation of CJC-1295 in equine plasma and of GHRH analogues in human urine at low pg/mL
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Timms et al. published an LC-MS/MS method for confirming CJC-1295 abuse in equine plasma. Human work has developed antibody-free ultrafiltration and immunopurification approaches with nanoLC and high-resolution mass spectrometry capable of detecting GHRH analogues in urine at low picogram-per-millilitre concentrations, and blood-based screening for peptidic drugs in the 2-10 kDa range. GHRH and its analogues, including CJC-1295, sermorelin and tesamorelin, are prohibited at all times in sport under WADA class S2, peptide hormones, growth factors, related substances and mimetics. The analytical challenge specific to this compound is that the circulating form is an albumin adduct, so a method optimised for free peptide will under-recover it.
Source
Timms M et al., Drug Test Anal 2019;11:1248-1257; Coppieters G et al., J Pharm Biomed Anal 2022;214:114726; Thomas A et al., Anal Sci Adv 2022;3:235-243
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim

Where else this substance is registered

FDA substance identifier (UNII)
62RC32V9N7
CAS registry number
446262-90-4
PubChem compound
91971820
RxNorm concept
1805005

Checks this page had to pass

  • Passed

    Identity resolved

    no open identity hold

  • Passed

    No unresolved merge across substance families

    no quarantine open

  • Passed

    Every public sentence names a source

    The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.

  • Not passed

    Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence

    No registered study is classified as testing this substance.

  • Passed

    No internal keys in reader text

    enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page

  • Passed

    Safety mode resolved

    The identity record classes it as investigational; no register records an approval.

  • Passed

    Canonical metadata present

    slug and display name present

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

How this medicine reached us

Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.

What the approval register records

  • The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20190620.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 87621-032 · read 2026-08-29

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What to learn next

Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.

This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.

What is not here

6 questions this page could not answer

These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.

  • What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.

The record as stored

The full record, for auditing

Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.

The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record

Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.

A GHRH analogue that binds covalently to albumin and raises growth hormone 2- to 10-fold for six days and IGF-1 for nine to eleven days from a single subcutaneous injection, with a measured half-life of 5.8-8.1 days, one terminated phase 2 and no clinical outcome data of any kind.

Recorded evidence blocks (4)

What did CJC-1295's largest trial (120 people) and its longest (9 months) measure?


120 people in CJC-1295's largest registered study, 9 months in its longest registered window. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

1 phase2; NCT00267527; 2006-09; no ageing endpoint recorded

These counts include studies where CJC-1295 was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.

Show the evidence
  • phase2
    1

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

CJC-1295 was tested only in human — what did it show?


human: mechanism-only (1): the rungs where CJC-1295 has a recorded finding. Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov · organism ladder · 2026-09-01

1 of 8 rungs carry a finding; no outcome wording is recorded.

Yeast C. elegans Drosophila Mouse Rat Dog Non-human primate Human mechanism-only
Show the evidence
  • human
    mechanism-only; 1

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

At the median, CJC-1295's trials enrolled 120 people — anything larger?


Median enrolment
120
Largest enrolment
120
Registered trials counted
1

What is recorded about CJC-1295 and IGF-1?


"Wound-healing peptides such as BPC-157, TB-500, and GHK-Cu promote angiogenesis, integrin-mediated extracellular matrix remodeling, and fibroblast activation, whereas growth hormone secretagogues like ipamorelin, CJC-1295, tesamorelin, sermorelin, and AOD-9604 activate IGF-1 signaling and satellite cell repair." — where CJC-1295 and IGF-1 appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-01-02

IGF-1; PMID 41490200

Show the evidence
  • IGF-1 PMID 41490200
    "Wound-healing peptides such as BPC-157, TB-500, and GHK-Cu promote angiogenesis, integrin-mediated extracellular matrix remodeling, and fibroblast activation, whereas growth hormone secretagogues like ipamorelin, CJC-1295, tesamorelin, sermorelin, and AOD-9604 activate IGF-1 signaling and satellite cell repair."

recorded 2026-01-02 · last checked 2026-09-04

Where it is registered
Identifiers, relations and other names

The exact record

PubChem CID
91971820
CAS number
446262-90-4
RxCUI
1805005
Trade name
CJC-1295 with DAC. The product sold as "CJC-1295 without DAC" is a different molecule, modified GRF(1-29)
Development code
CJC1295
Sources (4)

Sources

ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence

How these records are assembled · Which registers were checked

Index-quality checks
  • identity passed: no open identity hold
  • required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
  • public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
  • source coverage passed: 4 source rows
  • no critical contamination: no quarantine open
  • canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
  • no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page

This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.