This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Ligandrol does in the body
Muscle loss after hip fracture — investigational only, and development stopped
Ligandrol is a small molecule that binds the same receptor testosterone binds, and switches on the same muscle-building gene programme, without being a steroid. In the two randomised trials it did precisely that: lean body mass went up, in a straight line with the dose. It also did the other thing androgens do — it told the brain to stop making testosterone, and the men in the phase 1 saw their own testosterone, SHBG and HDL cholesterol fall dose-dependently. Those two facts are the same drug acting on the same receptor in two places.
What happened in people
Placebo-corrected lean body mass gains of 4.75%, 7.15% and 9.08% at 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 mg over 12 weeks in 108 patients after hip fracture, all confidence intervals excluding zero
✎ 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 recorded finding that sits closest to something a person would notice. Written into the record, not signed off, and it carries no population or interval.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Its recorded molecular formula is C14H12F6N2O, weighing 338.25.
PubChem record · 44137686 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 141 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.
Absolute difference
An absolute difference is how many more people in a hundred were affected.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like counting heads in two rooms of a hundred.
Where that stops being true. Heads are easy to count. Study results carry a margin of error too.
What people get wrong. It is confused with a percentage change, which can look far larger.
The arithmetic difference in event rates between arms.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
What happened in people◇Read 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.
Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics over 21 days
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Basaria 2013 phase 1 in healthy young men
How many people
76
Study design
Phase 1
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
No drug-related serious adverse events; dose-dependent suppression of total testosterone, SHBG, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides; dose-dependent increase in lean body mass
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. HDL cholesterol and triglycerides fell dose-dependently — a lipid change reported in the paper but rarely carried into secondary descriptions of the compound.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral capsule, once daily; doses tested in trials were 0.1 mg to 2.0 mg
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
RNAWiki holds 2 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 it changes in the body◇Read 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.
Start
Ligandrol
What a person takes: Oral capsule, once daily; doses tested in trials were 0.1 mg to 2.0 mg.
The measurement behind this step
A capsule in both trials. Outside trials it is most often a liquid in a dropper bottle sold as a research reagent. The entire published human dose range is 0.1 mg to 2.0 mg daily, and the higher of those two figures comes from a single 12-week trial in 108 people.
Getting in
Oral, and it accumulates
Taken as a capsule. It has a long half-life, so the amount in the blood keeps building for several days of daily dosing before it levels off.
╌╌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
Orally bioavailable with a long elimination half-life and dose-proportional accumulation on multiple dosing, characterised in the phase 1 at 0.1, 0.3 and 1.0 mg daily. Metabolised to dihydroxylated and carboxylated products that are the targets of doping-control confirmation.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
The receptor it acts on sits inside the cell, so the molecule has to get through the cell membrane first.
╌╌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
Passive diffusion into the cytoplasm; binds the androgen receptor ligand-binding domain, displacing heat-shock chaperones and permitting nuclear import.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
It locks into the same pocket testosterone uses, holding the receptor in an active shape.
╌╌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
High-affinity, selective binding to AR. The non-steroidal scaffold stabilises a receptor conformation whose coregulator recruitment differs by tissue, which is the structural account offered for anabolic activity in muscle without a measurable PSA change over 21 days.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Two consequences at once: muscle genes on, gonadal axis off
In muscle it turns on growth genes. In the brain the same signal is read as "there is plenty of androgen here", so the body stops making its own.
╌╌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
Ligand-bound AR dimerises and transactivates androgen response elements in myonuclei. The identical signal at hypothalamic and pituitary AR suppresses GnRH and gonadotropin output, producing the dose-dependent falls in total testosterone, SHBG and, at 1 mg, FSH and free testosterone recorded in the phase 1. Hepatic androgen signalling reduces HDL cholesterol by the same class mechanism.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Lean mass rises measurably; nothing else was measured
Scans reliably show more lean tissue, dose for dose. No trial has published whether that made anyone stronger, faster or better able to walk.
╌╌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
Placebo-corrected TBLH lean body mass rose 4.75%, 7.15% and 9.08% at 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 mg over 12 weeks in the hip fracture phase 2. Physical function was not the posted primary endpoint of that trial, and no larger trial followed.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
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 unclear◇Read 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: 76 healthy young men in the phase 1, and 108 adults aged 65 and over recovering from acute hip fracture in the phase 2. Outside trials: overwhelmingly young men buying it online, at doses far above anything tested.
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
No phase 3 was registered after the phase 2 completed in December 2017 with a positive result on its own primary endpoint
The compound has no approval anywhere and no completed trial with a functional primary endpoint
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 take◇Read 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 take◇Read 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
Oral capsule, once daily; doses tested in trials were 0.1 mg to 2.0 mg
✎ 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 capsule in both trials. Outside trials it is most often a liquid in a dropper bottle sold as a research reagent. 0 mg daily, and the higher of those two figures comes from a single 12-week trial in 108 people.
✎ 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 and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No register entry is recorded.
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 take◇Read 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
Over 21 days at up to 1 mg there were no drug-related serious adverse events and no change in liver enzymes, haemoglobin, PSA or QT. Documented harms outside that window are drug-induced liver injury with a cholestatic or mixed pattern, suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis with the gynaecomastia and hypogonadism that follow it, and reduced HDL cholesterol. Because it suppresses endogenous testosterone dose-dependently, users commonly follow it with clomiphene or an aromatase inhibitor, and two of the published liver injury cases occurred during that phase rather than during the SARM itself.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
VK5211 phase 2 in patients 65 years or older after acute hip fracture — posted results, primary outcome by DXA at week 12 (NCT02578095) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
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 unclear◇Read 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
Oral capsule, once daily; doses tested in trials were 0.1 mg to 2.0 mg
✎ 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
Outside trials it is most often a liquid in a dropper bottle sold as a research reagent. 0 mg daily, and the higher of those two figures comes from a single 12-week trial in 108 people.
✎ 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 and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
3 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as non-nutrient/non-botanical and other combinations.
Those labels carry all other and no claim claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
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 take◇Read 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 Ligandrol 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 unclear◇Read 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 a lean body mass gain of this size translates into improved physical function or faster fracture recovery — not measured as a primary endpoint in either trial
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 unchanged 21-day liver panel predicts safety over the months-long, higher-dose exposures described in the case reports
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 phase 1 safety profile applies at the doses used outside trials, which are typically several times the highest dose ever administered under protocol
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 unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
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 Ligandrol 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 people◇Read 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.
Phase 2 after hip fracture: up to 9.1% more lean mass than placebo in 12 weeks
In plain words
In 108 people aged 65 and over recovering from a hip fracture, twelve weeks of ligandrol added lean body mass in a straight line with the dose, and the effect was clearly larger than placebo at every dose tested.
What was measured
Placebo-corrected percentage change in total-body-less-head lean body mass at week 12
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
VK5211 (NCT02578095) was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 in 108 patients aged 65 or older after acute hip fracture, run by Viking Therapeutics between October 2015 and December 2017. The posted primary result is placebo-corrected least-squares mean percentage change in total-body-less-head lean body mass by whole-body DXA at 12 weeks: 0.5 mg +4.75% (95% CI 1.70 to 7.80), 1.0 mg +7.15% (3.76 to 10.54), 2.0 mg +9.08% (5.55 to 12.60). All three confidence intervals exclude zero and the dose-response is monotonic. This is the largest placebo-controlled lean-mass effect published for any SARM.
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov posted results, NCT02578095 (VK5211 hip fracture study)
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 phase 2 measured mass, and stopped there
In plain words
The hip fracture trial asked one question: does a scan show more lean tissue? It did not ask whether anyone walked further, recovered faster or fell less often, and the programme did not continue.
What was measured
That a 9.1% placebo-corrected gain in lean body mass means faster recovery of function after hip fracture — an outcome the trial did not measure as its primary endpoint and no later trial tested
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The registered and posted primary outcome for NCT02578095 is a DXA body-composition measurement at 12 weeks. The trial reports no functional co-primary and no fracture-recovery outcome as its primary result. Enobosarm had already shown, in two 300-patient phase 3 trials, that a lean-mass responder advantage can coexist with no advantage on measured physical function. A programme that stops at a body-composition endpoint has not tested the claim its rationale depends on, and this one did not continue to a trial that would have.
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov registration and posted results, NCT02578095
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
Phase 1: dose-dependent suppression of testosterone, SHBG, HDL and triglycerides
In plain words
In 76 healthy men taking it for three weeks, ligandrol raised lean mass and at the same time lowered their own testosterone, their HDL cholesterol and their triglycerides, more at higher doses. Everything returned to baseline after stopping.
What was measured
Change in total testosterone, SHBG, HDL cholesterol and lean body mass over 21 days
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Basaria et al. randomised 76 healthy men aged 21 to 50 to placebo or 0.1, 0.3 or 1.0 mg LGD-4033 daily for 21 days, with follow-up for five weeks after. Lean body mass increased dose-dependently while fat mass did not change significantly. There were dose-dependent reductions in total testosterone, sex hormone-binding globulin, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides; FSH and free testosterone fell significantly only at 1.0 mg. Haemoglobin, PSA, AST, ALT and QT interval did not change significantly at any dose. Hormones and lipids returned to baseline after discontinuation. Three weeks at 1 mg is the outer edge of what has ever been characterised in healthy people.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
No liver signal in the phase 1; jaundice and cholestasis in the case reports
In plain words
The three-week trial found no change in liver enzymes at any dose. Case reports since 2021 describe men who took it for months and developed jaundice and liver injury.
What was measured
That an unchanged liver panel over 21 days at 1 mg predicts liver safety over months at doses nobody has measured
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Basaria et al. found no significant change in AST or ALT over 21 days at up to 1.0 mg daily. Labban et al. reported a 52-year-old man with pruritic jaundice, weight loss and raised liver enzymes after three months of high-dose LGD-4033, with other causes excluded. Koller et al. reported cholestatic injury with canalicular bile plugs and ductopenia on biopsy in young men who used ligandrol or ostarine followed by post-cycle therapy, recovering over three months. The two findings are not in conflict: a 21-day trial at 1 mg is not a test of three months at an unmeasured dose. What the case reports contradict is the inference drawn from the trial, not the trial.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
One of the three compounds that were actually in the bottles
In plain words
When 44 products sold as SARMs were bought and analysed, LGD-4033 was one of only three compounds found in the half of products that contained a SARM at all.
What was measured
Identity of active compounds found in 44 internet-purchased SARM products
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
In Van Wagoner et al., 23 of 44 internet-purchased products (52%) contained one or more SARMs, and those SARMs were ostarine, LGD-4033 or andarine. Seventeen products (39%) instead contained ibutamoren, GW501516 or SR9009; four (9%) contained no active compound; eleven (25%) contained a substance not on the label; and the measured content matched the label in only 18 of 44 (41%). Ligandrol is therefore one of the compounds most likely to be genuinely present in a product labelled as a SARM, and that is a statement about the market rather than about the drug.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Development stopped after phase 2, with no stated efficacy failure
In plain words
The hip fracture trial produced a clear positive result on its own endpoint, finished in 2017, and no phase 3 followed.
What was measured
Not recorded
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
NCT02578095 completed in December 2017 with a monotonic dose-response and all confidence intervals excluding zero on its primary endpoint. No phase 3 programme for VK5211 has been registered since. A compound with a clean dose-response on its registered primary endpoint that is not advanced is an informative record in itself: it tells a reader that the sponsor, seeing the full dataset, did not consider a body-composition endpoint sufficient to build a registration programme on. This page records the absence of a phase 3 as a fact and does not speculate about the reason.
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02578095 (completed 17 December 2017); no subsequent registered phase 3 for VK5211
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
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
1EJT54415A
CAS registry number
1165910-22-4
PubChem compound
44137686
ChEMBL
CHEMBL3545356
EMA substance identifier
300000017302
DrugBank
DB13934
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 unclear◇Read 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
8 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.
How close this is to real life — 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.
How this medicine reached us — 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.
The SARM with the largest randomised lean-mass effect on record — up to 9.1% above placebo in twelve weeks — measured in a phase 2 that never tested whether anyone walked better, in a programme that stopped there.
Recorded evidence blocks (2)
Q1
What became of the other 15 compounds aimed at AR?
13 unstated, 1 ongoing, 1 stopped: where the other compounds against this target stand.
AZD-3514, LGD-2941, MK-0773, Rezvilutamide, APC-100; 15 across 1 recorded target
Show the evidence
AZD-3514
unstated
LGD-2941
unstated
MK-0773
unstated
Rezvilutamide
ongoing
APC-100
unstated
GLPG0492
unstated
9 more recorded rows
Seviteronel
unstated
Pruxelutamide
unstated
Galeterone
stopped
LY2452473
unstated
HE3235
unstated
DIMETHYLCURCUMIN
unstated
GSK2849466
unstated
CR 1447
unstated
GSK2881078
unstated
Q2
Ligandrol on AR: which action is recorded?
Recorded action
modulator
Recorded targets
AR and Androgen receptor
Recorded mechanism rows
1
Not recorded here
a human dose and a registry trial
Mechanism (ChEMBL 37)
"Androgen Receptor modulator"
Show the evidence
modulatorCHEMBL1871
Androgen Receptor modulator; modulator
ARENSG00000169083
Androgen receptor
Androgen receptorCHEMBL1871
chembl-mechanism-target
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
✗ 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: 1 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.