BPC-157: what the studies show, status and safety
Summary
BPC-157 is a laboratory-made peptide of 15 amino acid building blocks that no medicines authority anywhere has approved. Almost everything known about it comes from experiments in animals. Four trials in people are registered, and none of them has published a result. Australia restricts even possessing it, and the World Anti-Doping Agency names it explicitly on its banned list.
Key findings at a glance
- Not one controlled result in people has been published. Four trials are listed on the American trial registry, and none of them has posted a result [1].
- 35 of the 36 studies in the big review were done in animals or cells. A 2025 review sifted through 544 articles and kept 36. Only one of those involved patients [2].
- The one attempt to repeat the findings elsewhere fell short. In 32 rats over four weeks, the rival peptide TB-500 produced results too clear-cut to be chance, both for tendon strength (p < 0.05) and for tissue quality (p = 0.016 for the Bonar score). BPC-157 did not [3].
- Sixteen patients in one report and twelve in another. That is the entire published human record: two uncontrolled series from a single private clinic [4] [5].
- The body clears half a dose in under 30 minutes. Measured in rats and in beagle dogs using a traceable version of the molecule. Nobody has measured it in a person [6].
- Banned in sport since 1 January 2022. BPC-157 was the very first substance named as an example in the anti-doping category S0 [7] [8].
- Restricted by name in Australia since 1 June 2024. Possessing it there without official permission is against the law [9].
What it is
BPC-157 is a peptide made in the laboratory, a chain of exactly 15 amino acid building blocks written as GEPPPGKPADDAGLV [10]. The name is short for Body Protection Compound. It has neither an official international drug name nor a classification code, and both of those follow from the simple fact that it has never been approved anywhere.
The story of where it comes from rests on a single research group in Zagreb. They describe the chain as a piece of a protein found in human gastric juice [11] [12]. Nobody outside that group has ever identified this parent protein as something the body actually produces from a gene, and a 2025 commentary treats its origin as an open question [13].
The older code names belong to a Croatian development programme that never led to an approved product. PL-10, PLD-116 and PL 14736 turn up in the group's own papers on inflammatory bowel disease [14]. PCO-02 is the product code used in the one registered early-stage trial [15].
Quick facts
| Field | Value | Ref |
|---|---|---|
| Sequence | GEPPPGKPADDAGLV, 15 residues | [10] |
| Class | Synthetic peptide, no established receptor | [16] |
| Formula and mass | C62H98N16O22, 1,419.5 g/mol | [10] |
| Half-life | Under 30 minutes, rats and dogs | [6] |
| Route in animal studies | Mostly intraperitoneal | [17] |
| Status | Investigational, approved nowhere | [18] [19] |
| Development codes | PL-10, PLD-116, PL 14736, PCO-02 | [14] [15] |
| Originating group | University of Zagreb, from 1993 | [11] |
| CAS registry number | 137525-51-0 | [10] |
| PubChem CID | 9941957 | [10] |
| UNII | 8ED8NXK95P | [10] |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL4297358 | [10] |
| DrugBank | DB11882 | [10] |
| INN and ATC code | None assigned | [10] |
How it works
Nobody has established what the peptide actually latches onto in the body. Four ideas are in circulation, and all of them come from cells in a dish or from rodents.
- Growth of new blood vessels. A group in Taiwan reported that the peptide switches on a receptor for the vessel growth signal VEGF in human cells lining the blood vessels, and that it increased the density of vessels in a chick membrane test [20].
- Nitric oxide, the body's own vessel-widening signal. In rats with a starved blood supply to the colon, the reported effects faded when the production of nitric oxide was blocked, which the authors took as evidence that this signalling route is involved [21].
- Cells moving within tendon. Rat tendon cells grown in a dish spread and migrated more, although they did not multiply any faster [22]. A later paper suggested that the cells carry more receptors for growth hormone [23].
- Signals from the brain. In rats under restraint, the protective effect on the stomach disappeared when the animals were given drugs that block dopamine or adrenaline, which points to those brain chemicals playing a part [24].
A 2025 review names the blood vessel and nitric oxide threads as the two best supported by the laboratory work, while still classing the substance itself as experimental [16].
The neighbouring product is a different thing altogether. TB-500 is a piece of another protein, thymosin beta-4, with a different sequence and a different proposed mechanism, so nothing on this page carries over to it [3].
What the studies found
Tendon and muscle (animal)
Animal data In rats whose Achilles tendon had been cut right through, the treated animals had tendons that withstood more force before tearing again, and they moved better than animals given plain salt water, over 14 days [17]. A model of the join between tendon and bone reported improvement over 21 days [25].
Animal data In rats with a cut thigh muscle, both the force the muscle could take and the animals' walking recovered towards normal over 72 days [26]. In a crushed calf muscle, treatment left a smaller bruise and lower levels of the enzymes that leak from damaged muscle, over 14 days [27].
Animal data The one study by an independent group that compared the peptides side by side split 32 rats into four groups and examined stitched tendons after four weeks. Tendons in the BPC-157 group did hold more force than the untreated ones, but not by enough to rule out chance. Only TB-500 cleared that bar [3].
Animal data In rats with a severed knee ligament, improvement was reported whichever of three ways the peptide was given, over 90 days [28]. In rabbits with a 0.8 cm gap cut into a forearm bone, more new bone had formed after six weeks than in the untreated animals [29].
Gut and wound models (animal)
Animal data Rat stomachs were damaged in three different ways, by stress from restraint, by alcohol and by a painkiller, and in all three cases the treated animals had less severe damage than the untreated ones [11]. An independent group in China reported that ulcers were held back by 45.7% to 65.6% at two doses, measured against the established stomach drug famotidine [30].
Animal data In rats with chemical burns, the wounds closed and grew new skin faster by day 18 [31]. In mice with a deep burn covering a fifth of the body surface (20%), treatment applied to the skin improved healing as seen under the microscope [32].
Animal data In rats whose spinal cord had been squeezed for 60 seconds, a single dose given ten minutes later was reported to improve movement of the tail. The animals were watched for up to 360 days [33].
Human data
Registered trials Four studies are on the register and not one has posted a result [1]. The study numbered NCT02637284 was meant to check safety and how the body handles the substance in 42 healthy volunteers. Its entry has not been touched since 17 December 2015 [15].
Registered trials An early-stage study in people who have had shoulder tendon surgery, planned for 30 participants, is due to start on 1 January 2027 [35]. A fourth registry entry, in torn hamstrings, is left out of the count here because its sponsor filed further entries whose own summaries call them mock or fictional example records [34]. One completed study in 40 people tested a chewable sweet containing several ingredients rather than the peptide on its own [36].
Count taken from the American trial registry on 6 September 2026, searching six spellings of the name; one further entry is excluded because its sponsor also filed self-declared mock records. Source [1], with [15], [34], [35], [36].
Case series A clinic looked back through its own files on patients injected in the knee for pain and managed to reach 16 of 17 of them by telephone. Twelve had been given BPC-157 on its own, and 11 of those said they had improved markedly [4]. There was no comparison group and no properly tested questionnaire. A 2026 overview calls the report flawed in the way it was conducted [37].
Case series A small uncontrolled study in 12 women with a painful bladder condition reported that symptoms disappeared completely in 10 of them and improved by 80% in the other 2, after a single procedure through a bladder camera [5]. In a condition that comes and goes and responds strongly to dummy treatment, a study without a comparison group cannot tell the treatment apart from the passage of time.
Overall appraisal The 2025 review concluded that there are no usable human data at all [2]. A 2026 sports medicine review describes solid human safety data as scarce [38].
A 2025 review in orthopaedic sports medicine sifted 544 articles, kept 36, and found only 1 involving patients. Source [2].
What is still unknown
- Whether it can cause cancer. No study on that question has ever been published [16] [38].
- Whether it damages genetic material. The standard battery of tests has never been published either [16] [38].
- What the human body does with it. Every measurement on record comes from rats and dogs [6].
- Whether the immune system reacts to it. The American regulator names this as a risk that depends on how the substance is given, and there are no human data behind it [18].
- New blood vessels in the wrong places. Vessel growth also feeds solid tumours and the eye disease that blinds people with diabetes. No published study has looked at that [16] [20].
- Whether the results hold up elsewhere. Nearly all the work showing an effect comes from a single group, and the one attempt to repeat it directly fell short of a clear result [13] [3].
Side effects and safety
There is no controlled body of safety data in people. What does exist is set out below.
- Neither case series reported any side effects. With 16 and 12 participants, no comparison group and no systematic recording of what happened, that says nothing about safety [4] [5].
- The one early-stage trial never reported. The single study designed to produce human safety data has been silent since 2015 [15].
- No toxicology report can be found. The originating group states that no dose proved lethal, but only as an aside scattered through its papers, never as an actual study report [12].
- The American regulator says the question is open. Its risk statement names reactions from the immune system and the fact that nobody has pinned down what impurities the material contains, and then comes to the deeper problem [18].
- One paper was withdrawn. A publication from the originating group on disturbed blood salts in rats was taken back by the journal that printed it [39].
The agency's own wording is worth quoting:
"FDA has identified no, or only limited, safety-related information for the proposed routes of administration. Therefore, the agency lacks sufficient information to know whether the drug would cause harm when administered to humans." [18]
Material produced outside regulated manufacturing comes with no guarantee that it is what the label says, that it is pure, or that it is free of germs. The American regulator lists both the impurities typical of peptides and the identification of the active ingredient itself as unresolved [18]. A 2025 orthopaedic commentary describes the substance as unregulated and freely available online [40].
Doses used in studies
The doses below are simply what the cited studies gave, listed so that the results can be understood. They are not advice on how to use anything.
Almost every row describes an animal experiment. The doses differ by a factor of about a billion between the smallest and the largest, and several studies report much the same effect right across that range, which is itself a reason to treat the numbers with caution.
| Study | Model | Dose | Route | Duration | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sikirić 1996, gastric lesions | Rat | 10 µg/kg and 10 ng/kg | Intraperitoneal | Single, acute | [11] |
| Sikirić 1997, gastroprotection under blockade | Rat | 10 µg/kg and 10 ng/kg | Intraperitoneal or intragastric | Single, before 48 h stress | [24] |
| Sebecić 1999, segmental bone defect | Rabbit | 10 µg/kg or 10 ng/kg | Local or intramuscular | Days 7 to 21, read at 6 weeks | [29] |
| Staresinic 2003, transected Achilles tendon | Rat | 10 µg/kg, 10 ng/kg or 10 pg/kg | Intraperitoneal | Daily to 14 days | [17] |
| Xue 2004, gastric ulcer | Rat | 400 ng/kg and 800 ng/kg | Intramuscular or intragastric | Model-dependent | [30] |
| Krivic 2006, tendon-to-bone healing | Rat | 10 µg/kg, 10 ng/kg or 10 pg/kg | Intraperitoneal | Daily to 21 days | [25] |
| Staresinic 2006, transected quadriceps | Rat | 10 µg/kg, 10 ng/kg or 10 pg/kg | Intraperitoneal | Daily to 72 days | [26] |
| Cerovecki 2010, medial collateral ligament | Rat | 10 µg/kg or 10 ng/kg; 1.0 µg per g cream; 0.16 µg/ml in water | Intraperitoneal, topical or peroral | 90 days | [28] |
| Duzel 2017, ischaemic colitis | Rat | 10 µg/kg as a 1 ml bath | Local bath on the colon segment | Single, acute | [21] |
| Perovic 2019, spinal cord compression | Rat | 200 µg/kg or 2 µg/kg | Intraperitoneal | Single, follow-up to 360 days | [33] |
| Biçer 2026, tendon healing versus TB-500 | Rat, about 330 g | 10 µg/kg per day | Intraperitoneal | 4 weeks | [3] |
| NCT02637284, phase 1 | Human, 42 healthy volunteers | 1 mg tablets, 1 to 6 per administration | Oral | Planned over 14 days | [15] |
| Lee 2024, interstitial cystitis pilot | Human, 12 women | 10 mg in total | Injection at cystoscopy | Single procedure | [5] |
The two human rows need a caveat. The early-stage figure is only what a registry entry planned, and that study never produced a result. The 2024 figure describes a single procedure carried out by the investigators while they watched what they were doing. No country has an approved dose, because no country has an approved product.
Development and approval status
Status and development timeline
- 1993-1996First descriptions from the Zagreb groupRefs [11], [14]
- 2000sPhase 2 work in inflammatory bowel disease referred to under the Pliva codesNo study report retrievable; registry returns zero records for PL 14736, refs [14], [1]
- 2015The one phase 1 study is registered, then goes quietNCT02637284, last update 17 December 2015, ref [15]
- 1 January 2022Enters the WADA Prohibited List by name in class S0First substance ever named in that class, ref [7]
- 29 September 2023FDA places it in category 2 of the 503A interim policiesFor identified significant safety risks, refs [41], [42]
- 1 June 2024Australia lists it in Schedule 4 and Appendix D of the Poisons StandardPossession without authority unlawful, ref [9]
- 22 April 2026On the current FDA page it sits under substances nominated and then withdrawnNot a move to category 1, ref [18]
- 23-24 July 2026Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee considers free base and acetate for ulcerative colitisNon-binding; rulemaking would be required, ref [43]
- 1 January 2027Planned start of a phase 1 study after rotator cuff repair30 planned, ref [35]
- 1993 and 1996 — the group in Zagreb publishes the first descriptions [11].
- 2000s — mid-stage work in inflammatory bowel disease is mentioned under the old Croatian company codes. No study report can be found, and the trial registry holds nothing at all under PL 14736 [14] [1].
- 2015 — the one early-stage study is registered, and then nothing further happens [15].
- 1 January 2022 — the substance is named on the anti-doping prohibited list [7].
- 29 September 2023 — the American regulator puts it in category 2 of its rules for pharmacy-mixed medicines, meaning identified safety risks [41] [42].
- 1 June 2024 — Australia adds it to its poisons standard in a category that restricts possession [9].
- 22 April 2026 — on the regulator's current page it appears among substances that were proposed and then withdrawn by whoever proposed them, which is not the same as being cleared [18].
- 23 and 24 July 2026 — an expert committee discusses two forms of the substance for ulcerative colitis. Its votes are only advice, and changing the law would require a formal procedure [43].
| Market | Status | Since or note | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | Unapproved | Off the 503A list | [18] |
| European Union | Unapproved | No EPAR | [19] |
| Germany | Unapproved | EU route | [19] |
| United Kingdom | Unapproved | Unlicensed | — |
| Australia | Scheduled | Since 2024 | [9] |
| Canada | Unapproved | No identifier | — |
| Switzerland | Unapproved | Inferred | — |
Three rows carry no reference, and the German row is confirmed only through its European half. Registers list what does exist, never what does not, so those entries follow from the overall picture rather than from any statement by a regulator. Every query behind the table was run on 6 September 2026.
Australia stands apart because it names the substance in its own law. The entry carries a marker that places it in a further appendix [9], which covers poisons that may not be held without official permission, so the restriction extends to possession itself. The decision came out of the joint scheduling process published on 22 May 2024 [44].
The phrase "research chemical" is a selling term. It is not a legal category, and it exempts nobody from medicines law.
Anti-doping
BPC-157 is banned at all times, both in and out of competition. The 2026 prohibited list names it first among the examples in category S0, which covers "any pharmacological substance … with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use" [8]. It went onto the list on 1 January 2022, and it was the first substance ever named in that category [7].
The 2026-27 list used by American college sport names it among peptide hormones and growth factors [45]. The United States Anti-Doping Agency states plainly that no health authority in the world has approved the substance for use in people [46]. The wider picture is at peptides banned in sport.
Compared with related peptides
| Peptide | Class | Human studies | Status | WADA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BPC-157 | Synthetic 15-residue peptide [10] | None published; 3 registered, 0 results [1] | Approved nowhere [18] | Named in S0 [8] |
| TB-500 | Synthetic thymosin beta-4 fragment [3] | None controlled [38] | Approved nowhere [38] | Named in S2.3 [8] |
| Thymosin beta-4 | 43-residue endogenous peptide [47] | Phase 3 eye-drop RCT completed [47] | Approved nowhere [47] | Named in S2.3 [8] |
| GHK-Cu | Copper-binding tripeptide [48] | Small topical dermatology trials [48] | Cosmetic ingredient, not a medicine [48] | Not named on the list [8] |
These four are sold as though they belonged together, and the evidence pulls them apart. Thymosin beta-4 is the only one with a completed late-stage randomised trial, and that trial tested eye drops for a nerve-related disease of the cornea rather than anything to do with muscles or joints [47]. TB-500 is a piece of that same molecule and has no controlled trial in people of its own [38].
BPC-157 and TB-500 are constantly discussed as a pair. What they share is a marketplace, not a sequence or a mechanism. In the one study that compared them directly, TB-500 came out ahead on both of the measures that produced a clear result [3].
Common misconceptions
- "The FDA banned BPC-157." What happened was a classification, not a ban: category 2 in 2023, then a withdrawal by whoever had proposed it on the page current in April 2026, and an advisory committee vote in July 2026 that binds nobody [41] [18] [43].
- "BPC-157 and TB-500 are interchangeable." They have different sequences and different proposed mechanisms. In the one direct comparison, only TB-500 produced a result clear enough to count [3].
- "It is no longer on the anti-doping list." A 2025 review claims this, and it is simply wrong. The 2026 list names the substance in category S0 [49] [8].
- "Swallowing it and injecting it come to the same thing." Nearly all the animal work injected the peptide into the abdominal cavity, every measurement of what the body does with it comes from injections in animals, and the American regulator ties the risk of an immune reaction to how the substance is given [17] [6] [18].
- "There was a successful mid-stage trial in ulcerative colitis." The claim goes back to the old Croatian company codes, and no study report can be found. The registry holds nothing under PL 14736 [14] [1].
- "So many papers must add up to strong evidence." The 2025 review sifted 544 articles and could keep only 36, of which exactly one involved patients [2].
Background on how substances are classified is at are peptides legal and FDA approved peptides.
Frequently asked questions
Is BPC-157 approved as a medicine anywhere?
No. Not one of the countries examined has approved it as a medicine, as checked on 6 September 2026. It has neither an official international drug name nor a classification code, and both of those follow from the fact that nobody has approved it.
Did the FDA ban BPC-157?
No. In September 2023 the agency put it in category 2 of its interim rules for pharmacy-mixed medicines, the category for identified safety risks. On the page current in April 2026 it appears among substances that were proposed and then withdrawn by whoever proposed them. That is neither a clean bill of health nor a promotion to the safer category.
What happened at the FDA committee meeting on BPC-157 in July 2026?
An advisory committee on pharmacy-mixed medicines discussed two chemical forms of the substance for ulcerative colitis on 23 and 24 July 2026. The agency itself states that such recommendations bind nobody. A formal rule-making procedure would have to follow before anything changed in law.
How many human BPC-157 trials exist?
Four are registered, and none has published a result. An early-stage study from 2015 fell silent, one completed study tested a chewable sweet containing several ingredients, and two more begin in 2026 and 2027. Outside the registry there are two small reports on handfuls of patients, neither with a comparison group.
What does the BPC-157 animal evidence actually show?
Faster or more complete healing across many kinds of injury in rats, mice and rabbits. Nearly all of it comes from a single group in Zagreb, measured against animals given plain salt water in the same laboratory. The one attempt by another group to repeat it, in rat tendons, produced a result too weak to rule out chance.
Are there BPC-157 safety data in humans?
Not in any useful sense. Two small reports covering 16 and 12 patients mention no side effects, but a report of that size without a comparison group cannot show that a substance is safe. Whether it causes cancer, damages genetic material or provokes the immune system has never been studied.
Is BPC-157 banned in sport?
Yes, by name and at all times. It is the first example listed in anti-doping category S0, which has applied to it since 1 January 2022. The list used by American college sport for 2026-27 also names it, among peptide hormones and growth factors.
Why is Australia treated differently for BPC-157?
Because it is the only country examined that names the substance in its own law. Its poisons standard lists it among prescription-only substances and adds a marker that brings it under a further appendix, and that appendix makes holding the substance without official permission a criminal matter.
How long does BPC-157 stay in the body?
In rats and beagle dogs the body clears half of a dose in under 30 minutes, breaking the peptide down quickly into fragments and single building blocks. Nobody has measured this in a person. That short survival time sits awkwardly next to animal studies that report effects 72 or 90 days later.
Is "research chemical" a legal category for BPC-157?
No. It is a selling term with no standing in law whatsoever. It exempts nobody from medicines law, and it guarantees nothing about what the material is, how pure it is or whether it is free of germs.
Sources
- ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Count query across six term variants for BPC-157, run 6 September 2026. Three registered studies are counted here; a fourth entry is excluded, see [34]. "PL 14736" and "PL14736" return zero records. https://clinicaltrials.gov/search?term=BPC-157
- Vasireddi N, Hahamyan H, Salata MJ, et al. (2025). Emerging use of BPC-157 in orthopaedic sports medicine: a systematic review. HSS Journal 21(4):485-495. PMID 40756949. DOI 10.1177/15563316251355551
- Biçer O, Adanir O, Güleryüz Y, et al. (2026). Effects of BPC-157 and TB-500 on Achilles tendon healing in rats: a histopathological and biomechanical study. Joint Diseases and Related Surgery 37(3):822-837. PMID 42542926. DOI 10.52312/jdrs.2026.2951
- Lee E, Padgett B. (2021). Intra-articular injection of BPC 157 for multiple types of knee pain. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 27(4):8-13. PMID 34324435
- Lee E, Walker C, Ayadi B. (2024). Effect of BPC-157 on symptoms in patients with interstitial cystitis: a pilot study. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 30(10):12-17. PMID 39325560
- He L, Feng D, Guo H, et al. (2022). Pharmacokinetics, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of body-protective compound 157, a potential drug for treating various wounds, in rats and dogs. Frontiers in Pharmacology 13:1026182. PMID 36588717. DOI 10.3389/fphar.2022.1026182
- World Anti-Doping Agency. WADA publishes 2022 Prohibited List. Approved by the Executive Committee on 14 September 2021, effective 1 January 2022. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/news/wada-publishes-2022-prohibited-list
- World Anti-Doping Agency. The 2026 Prohibited List, International Standard; sections S0 and S2.3 reviewed in full. Wording verified 6 September 2026 from the official promulgation, BGBl. III Nr. 219/2025, issued 30 December 2025. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/prohibited-list
- Therapeutic Goods (Poisons Standard—June 2024) Instrument 2024. Authorised version F2024L00589, signed 28 May 2024, effective 1 June 2024. Schedule 4 entry and Appendix D, clause 5, item 5. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/aus227554.pdf
- PubChem. CID 9941957, BPC-157. National Center for Biotechnology Information. Retrieved 6 September 2026. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/9941957
- Sikirić P, Seiwerth S, Grabarević Z, et al. (1996). Beneficial effect of a novel pentadecapeptide BPC 157 on gastric lesions induced by restraint stress, ethanol, indomethacin, and capsaicin neurotoxicity. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 41(8):1604-1614. PMID 8769287. DOI 10.1007/BF02087908
- Sikiric P, Sever M, Krezic I, et al. (2024). New studies with stable gastric pentadecapeptide protecting gastrointestinal tract. Inflammopharmacology 32(5):3119-3161. PMID 38980576. DOI 10.1007/s10787-024-01499-8
- Whitehouse M. (2025). Concerning BPC-157, a natural pentadecapeptide, that acts as a cytoprotectant and is believed to protect the gastro-intestinal tract. Inflammopharmacology 33(8):4879-4881. PMID 40759852. DOI 10.1007/s10787-025-01882-z
- Sikiric P, Seiwerth S, Brcic L, et al. (2006). Stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 in trials for inflammatory bowel disease (PL-10, PLD-116, PL 14736, Pliva, Croatia). Inflammopharmacology 14(5-6):214-221. PMID 17186181. DOI 10.1007/s10787-006-1531-7
- ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02637284, PCO-02 safety and pharmacokinetics trial. Sponsor PharmaCotherapia d.o.o. Last update 17 December 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02637284
- McGuire FP, Martinez R, Lenz A, Skinner L, Cushman DM. (2025). Regeneration or risk? A narrative review of BPC-157 for musculoskeletal healing. Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 18(12):611-619. PMID 40789979. DOI 10.1007/s12178-025-09990-7
- Staresinic M, Sebecic B, Patrlj L, et al. (2003). Gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 accelerates healing of transected rat Achilles tendon and in vitro stimulates tendocytes growth. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 21(6):976-983. PMID 14554208. DOI 10.1016/S0736-0266(03)00110-4
- US Food and Drug Administration. Certain bulk drug substances for use in compounding that may present significant safety risks. Content current as of 22 April 2026. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/human-drug-compounding/certain-bulk-drug-substances-use-compounding-may-present-significant-safety-risks
- European Medicines Agency. Medicines database search for BPC-157, run 6 September 2026; no records returned. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines
- Hsieh MJ, Liu HT, Wang CN, et al. (2017). Therapeutic potential of pro-angiogenic BPC157 is associated with VEGFR2 activation and up-regulation. Journal of Molecular Medicine 95(3):323-333. PMID 27847966. DOI 10.1007/s00109-016-1488-y
- Duzel A, Vlainic J, Antunovic M, et al. (2017). Stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 in the treatment of colitis and ischemia and reperfusion in rats: new insights. World Journal of Gastroenterology 23(48):8465-8488. PMID 29358856. DOI 10.3748/wjg.v23.i48.8465
- Chang CH, Tsai WC, Lin MS, Hsu YH, Pang JH. (2011). The promoting effect of pentadecapeptide BPC 157 on tendon healing involves tendon outgrowth, cell survival, and cell migration. Journal of Applied Physiology 110(3):774-780. PMID 21030672. DOI 10.1152/japplphysiol.00945.2010
- Chang CH, Tsai WC, Hsu YH, Pang JH. (2014). Pentadecapeptide BPC 157 enhances the growth hormone receptor expression in tendon fibroblasts. Molecules 19(11):19066-19077. PMID 25415472. DOI 10.3390/molecules191119066
- Sikirić P, Mazul B, Seiwerth S, et al. (1997). Pentadecapeptide BPC 157 interactions with adrenergic and dopaminergic systems in mucosal protection in stress. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 42(3):661-671. PMID 9073154. DOI 10.1023/a:1018880000644
- Krivic A, Anic T, Seiwerth S, et al. (2006). Achilles detachment in rat and stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157: promoted tendon-to-bone healing and opposed corticosteroid aggravation. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 24(5):982-989. PMID 16583442. DOI 10.1002/jor.20096
- Staresinic M, Petrovic I, Novinscak T, et al. (2006). Effective therapy of transected quadriceps muscle in rat: gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 24(5):1109-1117. PMID 16609979. DOI 10.1002/jor.20089
- Novinscak T, Brcic L, Staresinic M, et al. (2008). Gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 as an effective therapy for muscle crush injury in the rat. Surgery Today 38(8):716-725. PMID 18668315. DOI 10.1007/s00595-007-3706-2
- Cerovecki T, Bojanic I, Brcic L, et al. (2010). Pentadecapeptide BPC 157 (PL 14736) improves ligament healing in the rat. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 28(9):1155-1161. PMID 20225319. DOI 10.1002/jor.21107
- Sebecić B, Nikolić V, Sikirić P, et al. (1999). Osteogenic effect of a gastric pentadecapeptide, BPC-157, on the healing of segmental bone defect in rabbits. Bone 24(3):195-202. PMID 10071911. DOI 10.1016/s8756-3282(98)00180-x
- Xue XC, Wu YJ, Gao MT, et al. (2004). Protective effects of pentadecapeptide BPC 157 on gastric ulcer in rats. World Journal of Gastroenterology 10(7):1032-1036. PMID 15052688. DOI 10.3748/wjg.v10.i7.1032
- Huang T, Zhang K, Sun L, et al. (2015). Body protective compound-157 enhances alkali-burn wound healing in vivo and promotes proliferation, migration, and angiogenesis in vitro. Drug Design, Development and Therapy 9:2485-2499. PMID 25995620. DOI 10.2147/DDDT.S82030
- Sikiric P, Seiwerth S, Mise S, et al. (2003). Corticosteroid-impairment of healing and gastric pentadecapeptide BPC-157 creams in burned mice. Burns 29(4):323-334. PMID 12781609. DOI 10.1016/s0305-4179(03)00004-4
- Perovic D, Kolenc D, Bilic V, et al. (2019). Stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 can improve the healing course of spinal cord injury and lead to functional recovery in rats. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 14(1):199. PMID 31266512. DOI 10.1186/s13018-019-1242-6
- ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT07437547, registry entry on BPC 157 for acute hamstring muscle strain repair; sponsor Hudson Biotech. The same sponsor filed further entries whose own summaries call them a mock study, an example record or a fictional study (NCT07481734, NCT07437560, NCT07487363), so this entry is not counted here as a registered trial. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07437547
- ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT07803250, impact of BPC-157 on recovery following rotator cuff repair surgery. Sponsor University of Arkansas. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07803250
- ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT07752381, a clinical trial to evaluate the effects of peptide gummies on markers of inflammation, physical performance, and recovery. Sponsor Parlay Wellness. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07752381
- Mayfield CK, Bolia IK, Feingold CL, et al. (2026). Injectable peptide therapy: a primer for orthopaedic and sports medicine physicians. American Journal of Sports Medicine 54(1):223-229. PMID 41476424. DOI 10.1177/03635465251357593
- Mendias CL, Awan TM. (2026). Safety and efficacy of approved and unapproved peptide therapies for musculoskeletal injuries and athletic performance. Sports Medicine 56(8):1921-1935. PMID 41966639. DOI 10.1007/s40279-026-02437-0
- Withdrawn: stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 as a therapy of severe electrolyte disturbances in rats. (2025). Current Neuropharmacology. PMID 39865815. DOI 10.2174/011570159X349612241205065330
- DeFoor MT, Dekker TJ. (2025). Injectable therapeutic peptides — an adjunct to regenerative medicine and sports performance? Arthroscopy 41(2):150-152. PMID 39265666. DOI 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.09.005
- Alliance for Pharmacy Compounding. 503A categories update for September 2023. Secondary rendering of the FDA category listing; date of category 2 placement 29 September 2023. https://join.a4pc.org/hubfs/PDFs/503A-Categories-Update-for-September-2023-FINAL.docx.pdf
- US Food and Drug Administration. Bulk drug substances used in compounding under section 503A of the FD&C Act. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/human-drug-compounding/bulk-drug-substances-used-compounding-under-section-503a-fdc-act
- US Food and Drug Administration. July 23-24, 2026: meeting of the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee. Advisory Committee Calendar. https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/advisory-committee-calendar/july-23-24-2026-meeting-pharmacy-compounding-advisory-committee-07232026
- Therapeutic Goods Administration. Notice of final decision to amend (or not amend) the current Poisons Standard — ACMS #43, ACCS #37, joint ACMS-ACCS #35. Published 22 May 2024. https://www.tga.gov.au/resources/publication/scheduling-decisions-final/notice-final-decision-amend-or-not-amend-current-poisons-standard-acms-43-accs-37-joint-acms-accs-35
- National Collegiate Athletic Association. 2026-27 NCAA banned substances. Class 6, peptide hormones, growth factors, related substances and mimetics. https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ssi/substance/2026-27/2026-27NCAA_BannedSubstances.pdf
- United States Anti-Doping Agency. BPC-157: experimental peptide creates risk for athletes. https://www.usada.org/spirit-of-sport/bpc-157-peptide-prohibited/
- Sosne G, Ousler GW, Dunn SP, et al. (2022). 0.1% RGN-259 (thymosin β4) ophthalmic solution promotes healing and improves comfort in neurotrophic keratopathy patients in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked phase III clinical trial. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24(1):554. PMID 36613994. DOI 10.3390/ijms24010554
- Hussain M, Phelps R, Goldberg DJ. (2006). Effects of topical copper tripeptide complex on CO2 laser-resurfaced skin. Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery 8(4):252-259. PMID 16847171. DOI 10.1001/archfaci.8.4.252
- Józwiak M, Bauer M, Kamysz W, Kleczkowska P. (2025). Multifunctionality and possible medical application of the BPC 157 peptide — literature and patent review. Pharmaceuticals 18(2):185. PMID 40005999. DOI 10.3390/ph18020185. Cited as the origin of a widely repeated error about anti-doping status, not as a status reference.
Cite this page
Facts on this page were verified on 6 September 2026, and every register query behind the status table was run on that date. Three status rows are marked as inferred rather than verified.
myPeptides Research & Editing. (2026). BPC-157: what the studies show, status and safety. Version 1.0, 6 September 2026. myPeptides Peptide Register. Retrieved from https://mypep.app/peptides/bpc-157
How pages in this register are compiled and graded is described under methodology; the full register is at peptides.
| Version | Date | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 2026-09-06 | Initial publication |
Last verified: 6 September 2026. Next review: on publication of any registered human trial, on any change to the 503A listing, or on any change in the anti-doping classification.