This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Nandrolone Decanoate does in the body
A discontinued anabolic steroid formerly used for anaemia in kidney failure.
Nandrolone is testosterone with one carbon removed from the top of the steroid skeleton. That single change has two consequences that define the drug. The enzyme that normally amplifies testosterone in the prostate and scalp converts nandrolone instead into a weaker compound, so it is comparatively kind to the prostate and the hairline. And the resulting molecule looks enough like progesterone that it binds the progesterone receptor too, which is why it affects prolactin and libido in ways testosterone does not. The decanoate ester is a ten-carbon chain that makes one injection last weeks.
What happened in people
Seven small studies in women found fewer fractures, more muscle and less pain, alongside facial hair, acne and voice changes.
✓ 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
A lower prostate effect does not establish safety for the heart.
Where it acts
Androgen receptor in skeletal muscle myonuclei, bone and erythroid progenitors in bone marrow
Kind of result
Symptoms and quality of life
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 chemical.
FDA substance registry · H45187T098 · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C28H44O3, weighing 428.6.
PubChem record · 9677 · 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.
The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.
The four opening statements run to 127 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.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
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.
Formulation
A formulation is the exact made-up form a substance comes in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like the difference between a whole bean and instant coffee.
Where that stops being true. Coffee tastes different. A formulation can change how much reaches the blood.
What people get wrong. Two products with the same name are assumed to behave the same. They often do not.
The specific composition and physical form of a product, including salt, excipients and release profile.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
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.
Fracture risk, bone mineral density, forearm bone mineral content, pain and muscle mass versus placebo
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Camara 2025 meta-analysis of 7 randomised trials in postmenopausal osteoporosis
How many people
293
Study design
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Measured performance
What was found
Fracture reduction at moderate certainty; forearm bone mineral content gain at moderate certainty; bone mineral density gain at low certainty; pain reduction and muscle mass gain at moderate certainty
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. Higher incidence of mostly mild virilising adverse events — hirsutism, acne, voice changes — at low certainty. Sample sizes were small and the constituent trials are old, which the authors flag as limiting.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oil-based intramuscular injection of the decanoate ester; 100 mg/mL and 200 mg/mL strengths in the approved products
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
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 happened in people◇Read 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.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.1 registered measure of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Mouse, Rat. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□A guess from softwareNo 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 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
Nandrolone Decanoate
What a person takes: Oil-based intramuscular injection of the decanoate ester; 100 mg/mL and 200 mg/mL strengths in the approved products.
The measurement behind this step
An oil solution injected intramuscularly, dosed at intervals of one to four weeks because of the long ester. The approved United States products were 100 mg/mL and 200 mg/mL. What circulates outside the supply chain is the same ester in an oil vehicle prepared without sterility assurance or content testing.
Getting in
Injected as a long-chain ester, released over weeks
The decanoate is a ten-carbon fatty chain attached to the steroid. It sits in an oil depot in the muscle and releases slowly, so a single injection lasts weeks.
╌╌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
Nandrolone decanoate is dissolved in a vegetable oil vehicle and injected intramuscularly. Tissue esterases cleave the decanoate to release free nandrolone, with the long chain giving a terminal half-life measured in days to weeks. The phenylpropionate ester is the shorter-acting alternative.
The freed steroid diffuses into cells everywhere and reaches the receptor inside.
╌╌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 membrane diffusion of free 19-nortestosterone; binding to the cytoplasmic androgen receptor with high affinity, and to the progesterone receptor with meaningful affinity.
Gets weaker, not stronger, where 5-alpha-reductase is present
In the prostate and scalp, the enzyme that makes testosterone more powerful makes nandrolone less powerful. That is the inversion the whole drug is built on.
╌╌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
5-alpha-reductase converts nandrolone to 5alpha-dihydronandrolone, which has lower androgen receptor affinity than the parent — the opposite of the testosterone-to-dihydrotestosterone conversion. Aromatisation to oestradiol occurs but at a much lower rate than for testosterone.
Muscle, bone and marrow respond; the gonadal axis and prolactin do too
Muscle and bone build, and the bone marrow makes more red cells. Meanwhile the brain stops signalling the testes, and the progesterone-like activity affects prolactin.
╌╌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
Androgen response element transactivation in myonuclei, osteoblasts and erythroid progenitors. Hypothalamic and pituitary androgen receptor agonism suppresses LH and FSH, and the long ester makes that suppression prolonged. Progesterone receptor agonism is the standard explanation for the prolactin and libido effects that distinguish this compound from testosterone.
Fractures reduced in the osteoporosis trials, with virilisation
Across seven randomised trials in postmenopausal women it reduced fractures, increased forearm bone content and muscle, reduced pain, and caused hirsutism, acne and voice changes.
──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
Moderate-certainty fracture reduction and pain reduction, moderate-certainty forearm bone mineral content and muscle mass gains, low-certainty bone mineral density gains, and low-certainty higher incidence of mostly mild virilising adverse events, across 293 randomised participants.
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 it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
bone mineral density measure
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (2)
reversal of growth arrest
who discontinue pes due to traes
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
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.
Historically, dialysis patients with anaemia and postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Now, almost entirely people using it for muscle, and patients in the countries where it remains registered.
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
Its approved indication was made obsolete by recombinant erythropoietin, and every United States product was discontinued
The randomised osteoporosis evidence consists of small, methodologically limited trials from a previous era and has never been repeated with modern methods
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 for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
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.
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf.
On this record: This record is linked to 1 related forms. Evidence does not carry across all of them.
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 (9)
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
Withdrawn
❝ 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
Oil-based intramuscular injection of the decanoate ester; 100 mg/mL and 200 mg/mL strengths in the approved products
✎ 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.
A register records the withdrawal of an approval.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
An oil solution injected intramuscularly, dosed at intervals of one to four weeks because of the long ester. The approved United States products were 100 mg/mL and 200 mg/mL. What circulates outside the supply chain is the same ester in an oil vehicle prepared without sterility assurance or content testing.
✎ 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
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 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
The label carries the class warning on peliosis hepatis and hepatic tumours, and contraindicates the drug in male breast or prostate carcinoma, in female breast carcinoma with hypercalcaemia, in pregnancy, and in nephrosis. In the osteoporosis trials the reported harms were mostly mild virilising effects: hirsutism, acne and voice change. By mechanism, a long-acting injectable androgen suppresses LH and FSH profoundly and for a prolonged period after the last dose. Rodent studies report adverse myocardial proteome changes and cardiac tissue effects when combined with strenuous resistance training. Progesterone receptor activity distinguishes its side effect profile from testosterone.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Nandrolone Decanoate appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 7 most-reported reaction terms, 27 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · 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
Oil-based intramuscular injection of the decanoate ester; 100 mg/mL and 200 mg/mL strengths in the approved products
✎ 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 approved United States products were 100 mg/mL and 200 mg/mL. What circulates outside the supply chain is the same ester in an oil vehicle prepared without sterility assurance or content testing.
✎ 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
11 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 11 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83511-017 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as powder.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83511-017 · read 2026-08-29
5 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as amino acid/protein, non-nutrient/non-botanical and other combinations.
Those labels carry all other and structure/function 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 on this page does not automatically apply to this one.
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, withdrawn medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Nandrolone Decanoate 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 favourable prostate and scalp profile implies broad safety, when the concerns documented for this compound are cardiac and endocrine
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 osteoporosis fracture result, obtained in small old trials at doses used under medical supervision, describes what happens at the doses used for muscle
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 peliosis hepatis class warning applies to this drug with the same force as to the 17alpha-alkylated orals, which it is not
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.
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 Nandrolone Decanoate 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.
Seven randomised trials in postmenopausal osteoporosis reduced fracture risk
In plain words
Pooling seven randomised trials in 293 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, nandrolone decanoate reduced fractures, increased forearm bone mineral content, reduced pain and increased muscle mass. It also caused facial hair, acne and voice changes.
What was measured
Fracture incidence, bone mineral density, forearm bone mineral content, pain and muscle mass versus placebo
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Camara et al. conducted a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251147647), comparing nandrolone decanoate with placebo in postmenopausal women with primary osteoporosis. Seven trials with 293 participants were included, with sample sizes varying by outcome. Nandrolone reduced fracture risk with moderate-certainty evidence; produced modest increases in bone mineral density at low certainty and more substantial gains in forearm bone mineral content at moderate certainty; reduced pain and increased muscle mass, both at moderate certainty. It was associated with a higher incidence of mostly mild virilising adverse events — hirsutism, acne, voice changes — at low certainty. The authors note the small sample sizes and methodological limitations of the older trials. A fracture-reduction signal in a randomised comparison is a genuinely uncommon thing for a compound in this group to have.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The approved indication was anaemia of renal insufficiency, and the label says so
In plain words
The United States label reads that nandrolone decanoate is indicated for the anaemia of kidney failure and has been shown to increase haemoglobin and red cell mass, with surgically anephric patients responding less well.
What was measured
Approved indication text on the United States label
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The nandrolone decanoate prescribing information states the indication as management of the anaemia of renal insufficiency, with the drug shown to increase haemoglobin and red cell mass, and notes that surgically induced anephric patients have been reported to be less responsive. That last clause is a mechanistic clue in itself: it points to a component of the effect that depends on residual renal erythropoietin production, which is exactly what recombinant erythropoietin later replaced. Contraindications listed include breast carcinoma in men, known or suspected prostate carcinoma, breast carcinoma in women with hypercalcaemia, pregnancy, and nephrosis or the nephrotic phase of nephritis.
Source
Nandrolone decanoate injection prescribing information, Watson Laboratories, via DailyMed
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 same peliosis hepatis warning that the whole class carries
In plain words
The label warns in capital letters about blood-filled cysts in the liver and about liver tumours, exactly as the oxandrolone label does.
What was measured
Warning text on the United States label
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The nandrolone decanoate label carries the class warning: peliosis hepatis, in which liver and sometimes splenic tissue is replaced with blood-filled cysts, has been reported in patients receiving androgenic anabolic steroid therapy; the cysts are sometimes present with minimal hepatic dysfunction and at other times associated with liver failure, and are often unrecognised until life-threatening liver failure or intra-abdominal haemorrhage develops. It is worth being precise about what this warning is and is not: it is a class warning applied to injectable and oral anabolic steroids alike, and the hepatotoxicity best documented in the recent clinical literature belongs to the 17alpha-alkylated orals. Nandrolone decanoate is not 17-alkylated.
Source
Nandrolone decanoate injection prescribing information, Watson Laboratories, via DailyMed
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
Erythropoietin removed the indication, and the market removed the drug
In plain words
Recombinant erythropoietin made an androgen unnecessary for dialysis anaemia. Every nandrolone decanoate product in the United States is now listed as discontinued.
What was measured
That withdrawal from the market implies a safety judgement, when here it followed the arrival of a better drug for the same indication
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Drugs@FDA lists a series of nandrolone decanoate applications — Watson Laboratories, Abraxis, Epic Pharma, Quad Pharmaceuticals and others — and every one carries the marketing status Discontinued. The clinical reason is not obscure: recombinant human erythropoietin, approved from 1989, treats the anaemia of renal insufficiency directly and without androgenic effects, and the guideline position moved with it. The consequence is the pattern this whole group repeats. A molecule with real randomised evidence in two indications is unavailable through pharmacies, while remaining one of the most widely used and most frequently detected compounds in unsupervised use.
Source
openFDA Drugs@FDA — nandrolone decanoate applications ANDA086385, ANDA087519, ANDA088290 and others, all marketing status Discontinued
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
A small randomised trial in burn patients, published as a case for reinstatement
In plain words
Forty burn patients were randomised to nandrolone decanoate or standard care in a study whose authors explicitly framed it as an argument for bringing the drug back.
What was measured
Clinical and laboratory course to full recovery in 40 patients with 20 to 40% burns
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Ali and Ali ran a prospective randomised controlled study in 40 patients with burns covering 20% to 40% of body surface, assessing both groups clinically and biochemically through to full recovery, with a recall safety assessment years later. The paper is titled as proposing a new potential indication after recall. Forty patients is a small trial, it was single-centre, and the framing is openly advocacy for an indication rather than a neutral test of one. It is included here because it is the only randomised burn evidence for this specific steroid, and because the reader should be able to see how thin it is next to the fourteen-trial, 2,822-patient oxandrolone base for the same clinical problem.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
"Kind to the prostate" is a real mechanism with real limits
In plain words
Nandrolone genuinely becomes weaker rather than stronger in tissues that carry 5-alpha-reductase, which is the reverse of testosterone. That explains a lower prostate and scalp effect and says nothing about the heart.
What was measured
That a favourable prostate and scalp profile makes the compound broadly safer, when the documented concerns are cardiac and endocrine
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Testosterone is converted by 5-alpha-reductase into dihydrotestosterone, which binds the androgen receptor more strongly, amplifying androgenic effects in prostate and skin. Nandrolone is converted by the same enzyme into 5alpha-dihydronandrolone, which binds more weakly. That inversion is well established and it is the mechanistic basis for the drug's comparatively favourable prostate and scalp profile. It has no bearing on the cardiac literature, where rodent studies show adverse myocardial proteome changes and cardiac tissue effects when nandrolone is combined with resistance training, or on the profound and often prolonged suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis that follows a long-acting injectable androgen.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
5 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 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.
The anabolic steroid with a genuine randomised fracture-reduction result in postmenopausal osteoporosis across seven small trials, an approved indication that erythropoietin made obsolete, and a metabolite that turns up in anti-doping laboratories more often than almost anything else.
Recorded evidence blocks (11)
Q1
What did Nandrolone Decanoate's largest trial (168 people) and its longest (7 years) measure?
168 people in Nandrolone Decanoate's largest registered study, 7 years in its longest registered window, measuring Primary outcomes included change in lean body mass measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, quadriceps muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) measured by MRI, and knee extensor muscle strength. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
4 na, 3 phase2, 2 phase1, 2 phase4; NCT07568574; 2033-03-01. Last human test completed 2020, NCT03545347.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Nandrolone Decanoate 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
na
4
phase2
3
phase1
2
phase4
2
Last recorded human testNCT03545347
2020-06-03
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From mouse to human: where has Nandrolone Decanoate shown mechanism-only?
Interpretation Primary outcomes included change in lean body mass measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, quadriceps muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) measured by MRI,… — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
mouse
mechanism-only
rat
mechanism-only
humanNCT00250536
mechanism-only; Primary outcomes included change in lean body mass measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, quadriceps muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) measured by MRI, and knee extensor muscle strength.; 10
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
Could one person measure Nandrolone Decanoate's effect on reversal of growth arrest?
Reversal of growth arrest: measured in Nandrolone Decanoate's trials.
Interpretation reversal of growth arrest is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
reversal of growth arrest; 2026-09-01
bone mineral density measure; 2026-09-01
who discontinue pes due to traes; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
2
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
20; NCT02055456; PHASE1/PHASE2; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; COMPLETED
Q4
Which of bone mineral density measure, reversal of growth arrest and who discontinue pes due to traes did Nandrolone Decanoate's trials measure?
bone mineral density measure, reversal of growth arrest and who discontinue pes due to traes lead 3 outcome terms across Nandrolone Decanoate's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
3 terms in all.
Show the evidence
reversal of growth arrest
1
bone mineral density measure
1
who discontinue pes due to traes
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Which of Nandrolone Decanoate's 4 ongoing trials reports first?
Change in physical fitness as assessed by the SPPB test score; modified Harris Hip Score; latest 2033-03-01
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT05978206
"Study of the Effectiveness of Treatment of Sarcopenia With the Use of a Medicinal Product (Nandrolone), Comprehensive Physiotherapy and Diet"; n 168; "Change in physical fitness as assessed by the SPPB test score"; 2026-12-30
NCT06462482
"Peri-Operative Testosterone Administration in Primary Hip Arthroscopy"; n 60; "modified Harris Hip Score"; 2026-12
NCT06608914
"Peri-Operative Testosterone Administration in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty"; n 60; "modified Harris Hip Score"; 2026-12
NCT07568574
"Impact of Medically Supervised Performance-Enhancing Substances (PES) on Elite Athletes"; n 60; "The incidence and severity of Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), including adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), as assessed by the study physicians from baseline to 5.5 years after enrollment."; 2033-03-01
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which running trial of Nandrolone Decanoate could settle function?
NCT05978206 measures Change in physical fitness as assessed by the SPPB test score, reading out 2026-12-30.
1 open trial; n 168; "Study of the Effectiveness of Treatment of Sarcopenia With the Use of a Medicinal Product (Nandrolone), Comprehensive Physiotherapy and Diet"
Show the evidence
TrialNCT05978206
"Study of the Effectiveness of Treatment of Sarcopenia With the Use of a Medicinal Product (Nandrolone), Comprehensive Physiotherapy and Diet"; n 168; "Change in physical fitness as assessed by the SPPB test score"; 2026-12-30
Q7
Which 5 trials of Nandrolone Decanoate posted no result?
Posted no result
5 of 5 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00000854, NCT00250536, NCT02055456, NCT03263520 and NCT03545347
Completion dates
oldest 2003-05; newest 2020-06-03
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00000854
2003-05
NCT00250536
2004-10
NCT02055456
2017-02-01
NCT03263520
2017-10-31
NCT03545347
2020-06-03
Q8
At the median, Nandrolone Decanoate's trials enrolled 60 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
60
Largest enrolment
168
Registered trials counted
10
Q9
What do 27 spontaneous reports say about Nandrolone Decanoate — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Nandrolone Decanoate appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 7 most-reported reaction terms, 27 reaction mentions were counted: drug abuse 11; retinal vein occlusion 5; retinal haemorrhage 4; azoospermia 2. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1200946 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
drug abuse
11
retinal vein occlusion
5
retinal haemorrhage
4
azoospermia
2
focal segmental glomerulosclerosis
2
hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis suppression
2
1 more recorded row
blood gonadotrophin abnormal
1
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q10
Was Nandrolone Decanoate studied with exercise?
exercise is named in Nandrolone Decanoate's label sentences: "Twenty-four male Wistar rats were randomized into four groups with exercise and anabolic steroids (nandrolone decanoate) serving as variables." openfda-label+europepmc · 2013-12-14
1 recorded statement; exercise
Show the evidence
exercise
Twenty-four male Wistar rats were randomized into four groups with exercise and anabolic steroids (nandrolone decanoate) serving as variables.
recorded 2013-12-14 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q11
What is recorded about Nandrolone Decanoate and AMPK?
"Here, we investigated whether nandrolone decanoate (ND) administration mediates hypothalamic AMPK activation and glucose metabolism, thus affecting metabolic connectivity in brain areas of adult and aged mice." — where Nandrolone Decanoate and AMPK appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2022-04-12
AMPK; PMID 35415802
Show the evidence
AMPKPMID 35415802
"Here, we investigated whether nandrolone decanoate (ND) administration mediates hypothalamic AMPK activation and glucose metabolism, thus affecting metabolic connectivity in brain areas of adult and aged mice."
recorded 2022-04-12 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 7 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.