CJC-1295 (no DAC / Mod GRF 1-29)

CJC-1295 (no DAC / Mod GRF 1-29) at a Glance

CJC-1295 without DAC — also sold as modified GRF(1-29) — is a tetrasubstituted GHRH analogue, altered at four positions to resist the enzyme that ordinarily degrades GHRH within minutes. The result is a short-acting compound that produces a GH pulse rather than a sustained elevation, which is why it is typically paired with a ghrelin-receptor agonist that acts through the other GH-release pathway. It should not be confused with the DAC version, which binds albumin and lasts for days. It is an unapproved research chemical.

History & Development

CJC-1295 is a GHRH fragment rebuilt to survive in blood. This page covers the short-acting, non-DAC version - the one usually sold as Mod GRF 1-29.

First described	Not established in the sources consulted for this section
Discovered / synthesised by	Not established in the sources consulted for this section
Institution	Not established in the sources consulted for this section
Origin	Tetrasubstituted GHRH(1-29) analogue - substitutions at D-Ala2, Gln8, Ala15 and Leu27
Key patent	Not established in the sources consulted for this section
Assignee	Not established in the sources consulted for this section
Development status	Unapproved research peptide; never approved anywhere

Discovery

GHRH(1-29) - the active fragment also sold as sermorelin - is degraded within minutes, chiefly by DPP-4, which cleaves near the N-terminus. CJC-1295 addresses that with four substitutions: D-Ala at position 2 blocks the DPP-4 cleavage site, while Gln8, Ala15 and Leu27 protect other vulnerable points and improve stability.

The result is the same receptor and the same pituitary action as sermorelin, with a backbone that survives longer.

The name covers two different compounds, and confusing them is the commonest error with this peptide. The original CJC-1295 carried a DAC - a drug-affinity complex binding it to serum albumin, extending its half-life to days. The version here has no DAC: it is short-acting, producing a pulse rather than a sustained elevation. Vendors use “CJC-1295” for both.

Development & ownership

That distinction is not cosmetic - it is the pharmacological argument for this form. Growth hormone is normally released in pulses, and pulsatility appears to matter for its downstream effects. A DAC-bearing analogue raises GH continuously, which is the opposite of the physiological pattern; the non-DAC form is used specifically because it produces a pulse and lets levels fall between doses.

Neither form has been developed to approval, and this one has no dedicated human programme behind it.

How it reached the market

CJC-1295 without DAC is sold as an unapproved research peptide, typically stacked with a ghrelin-receptor agonist such as ipamorelin on the reasoning that driving both GH pathways at once produces a larger pulse than either alone. That combination has no approval and no controlled human evidence.

What It's Used For

First, the naming problem — because almost everything written about this compound gets it wrong. “CJC-1295” is used by vendors and by parts of the literature for two different molecules, and the difference is the whole story. This page covers the non-DAC form: growth-hormone-releasing hormone’s first 29 amino acids — GHRH(1-29), the fully bioactive fragment marketed as sermorelin — carrying four substitutions (D-Ala², Gln⁸, Ala¹⁵, Leu²⁷) that blunt enzymatic breakdown. That molecule is exactly what is sold as “Modified GRF 1-29”; “CJC-1295 no-DAC” and “Mod GRF 1-29” are the same thing, and it is best understood as sermorelin’s tetrasubstituted analogue. The other molecule adds a maleimidopropionyl-lysine that covalently latches onto circulating albumin — the Drug Affinity Complex — stretching the half-life from minutes to roughly a week. That is the one ConjuChem actually took into clinical trials, and it has its own page: CJC-1295 DAC. Hours versus days is not a footnote; it is the practical consequence of the entire distinction.

The second thing to be clear about is which molecule the evidence belongs to. Every verifiable human study of “CJC-1295” was run on the DAC form — four small pharmacology studies in healthy adults, plus one terminated Phase 2 ^{1,2,3Reference 1Teichman SL et al. · 2006RCTProlonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults — human (RCT)View study →Reference 2Ionescu M · 2006Clinical trialPulsatile secretion of growth hormone (GH) persists during continuous stimulation by CJC-1295, a long-acting GH-releasing hormone analog — human (clinical trial)View study →Reference 3Sackmann-Sala L et al. · 2009Activation of the GH/IGF-1 axis by CJC-1295, a long-acting GHRH analog, results in serum protein profile changes in normal adult subjects — humanView study →}.

This molecule has no dedicated human trial of any kind. Its human profile is inferred from the DAC data and from GHRH pharmacology generally, and inference is not evidence. Mechanistically it is a GHRH-receptor agonist — it prompts the pituitary to release the growth hormone it already makes — which puts it in a different class from the ghrelin-mimetic secretagogues (ipamorelin, GHRP-2/6, MK-677) it is usually stacked with, even though both get filed under “GH secretagogue.” Route is load-bearing: it is injected subcutaneously, oral bioavailability is effectively zero, and no oral product can deliver intact peptide. It has never been approved anywhere, for anything; the ConjuChem program was discontinued in 2006 and never resumed.

Evidence by IndicationStrength of support · Beta

Support is an experimental score I’m building — a composite weighted by study type (human > animal > in vitro > review) and study volume. It’s a beta: a fast way to rank strength of evidence at a glance, not a validated metric. Each application links down to its write-up. Note the unusual shape here: the highest-scoring row is scored on a different molecule, and says so.

01GH & IGF-1 elevation (read-across from the DAC sibling)Shaky30%Four small human PK/PD studies — but all on the albumin-bound DAC form, not this one ^{1,2,3Reference 1Teichman SL et al. · 2006RCTProlonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults — human (RCT)View study →Reference 2Ionescu M · 2006Clinical trialPulsatile secretion of growth hormone (GH) persists during continuous stimulation by CJC-1295, a long-acting GH-releasing hormone analog — human (clinical trial)View study →Reference 3Sackmann-Sala L et al. · 2009Activation of the GH/IGF-1 axis by CJC-1295, a long-acting GHRH analog, results in serum protein profile changes in normal adult subjects — humanView study →}. Read-across only; scored down heavily for that.

02Pulsatile GH release (this molecule, no-DAC)Shaky18%Rat GRF-receptor activation + GHRH-KO mouse growth normalization ^{4,5Reference 4Jetté L et al. · 2005In vitroHuman growth hormone-releasing factor (hGRF)1-29-albumin bioconjugates activate the GRF receptor on the anterior pituitary in rats: identification of CJC-1295 as a long-lasting GRF analog — animal (rat) / in vitroView study →Reference 5Alba M et al. · 2006AnimalOnce-daily administration of CJC-1295, a long-acting growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) analog, normalizes growth in the GHRH knockout mouse — animal (mouse)View study →}, plus general GHRH pharmacology. Zero human trials of the no-DAC form.

03Body composition & fat lossShaky12%No CJC-1295 trial of either form measured body composition. Extrapolated entirely from the approved, different drug tesamorelin ^{6Reference 6Stanley TL et al. · 2011Clinical trialEffects of a growth hormone-releasing hormone analog on endogenous GH pulsatility and insulin sensitivity in healthy men — human (clinical trial; tesamorelin)View study →}.

04Muscle gain, sleep, injury healing, anti-agingShaky0%Community protocols and vendor marketing only ^{13,14Reference 13Van Hout MC · 2016Netnography of female use of the synthetic growth hormone CJC-1295: pulses and potions — qualitative / netnographic studyView study →Reference 14Pineau T et al. · 2016The study of doping market: how to produce intelligence from Internet forums — forensic / market analysisView study →}. No trial of any kind — deliberately not given a score.

Mechanisms

Pharmacokinetics

The no-DAC form is given by subcutaneous injection. Peptide oral bioavailability is effectively zero, so oral “Mod GRF 1-29” products cannot deliver intact peptide regardless of what the label claims — the route is not a preference, it is the only thing that works. It is supplied as lyophilized powder requiring reconstitution with bacteriostatic water; reconstituted peptide needs refrigeration and degrades over time, and no independent stability data for gray-market product exists.

Its half-life has never been measured in a human trial. The “roughly 30 minutes” figure repeated across reviews, vendor pages and forums is plausible on structural grounds — the four substitutions slow proteolysis but nothing anchors the peptide to a carrier protein — yet it should be read as a design intention rather than a datum. What is measured belongs to the DAC form: covalent binding to albumin gives it a 5.8–8.1-day half-life and GH/IGF-1 elevation lasting one to several weeks per dose ^{1Reference 1Teichman SL et al. · 2006RCTProlonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults — human (RCT)View study →}. That contrast is the only quantitative PK statement here that rests on human data.

One consequence of the albumin conjugation is that the DAC form is awkward to catch on routine mass-spectrometry doping screens, which drove development of dedicated detection chemistry — immunoaffinity and nano-LC methods for GHRH analogues in human urine and plasma ^{10,11Reference 10Memdouh S et al. · 2021ReviewAdvances in the detection of growth hormone releasing hormone synthetic analogs — analytical reviewView study →Reference 11Uçaktürk E · 2026Analysis of growth hormone releasing hormone and its analogs in urine using nano liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole/orbitrap mass spectrometry — analytical method (human matrix)View study →}, and species-specific confirmation assays after CJC-1295 was found in equine plasma ^{12Reference 12Timms M et al. · 2019A method for confirming CJC-1295 abuse in equine plasma samples by LC-MS/MS — analytical method (equine)View study →}. It is worth noting what this literature says about the field: roughly half of all PubMed-indexed papers mentioning CJC-1295 are analytical methods for detecting it, not studies of what it does. The compound is better characterized as a doping analyte than as a therapy.

Clinical & regulatory status

CJC-1295 — in both forms — has never been approved by any regulator, in any country, for any indication. Its developer, the Canadian biotech ConjuChem, registered a single human trial: NCT00267527, a Phase 2 study of CJC-1295 in HIV patients with visceral obesity, sponsored by ConjuChem, which began December 2005 and is recorded on ClinicalTrials.gov as terminated, with no results posted and no reason for stopping entered in the registry record.

On the reported death — what is and isn’t verifiable. The trial was halted on 17 July 2006 after a participant died at a study site in Argentina; this was reported contemporaneously by aidsmap, which noted that ConjuChem confirmed only the site and released no further detail, and that the study had enrolled 192 participants across North and South America (more than the 120 in the registry record). The attending physician’s assessment, as later summarized, was that the most likely explanation was asymptomatic coronary artery disease with plaque rupture, unrelated to the study drug — and development was halted as a precaution rather than on a finding of causation. A widely repeated detail that the man died hours after an eleventh injection was described at the time as an unconfirmed anecdotal report, and I have found no primary source for it; it should not be treated as established. The honest summary is: a participant died, the trial stopped, causality was never demonstrated, and the program never restarted. Claims circulating online that CJC-1295 “killed someone” overstate a record that does not support them, and claims that the death was definitively unrelated overstate it in the other direction.

ConjuChem wound down in the early 2010s. No successor sponsor picked the program up, and no CJC-1295 trial has been registered anywhere since 2005. The compound is a WADA-prohibited substance (Section S2, peptide hormones, growth factors and related substances), banned in and out of competition. In the US it has no legal compounding pathway: the FDA placed CJC-1295 in Category 2 of the interim 503A bulk-substances list in September 2023 — the category for substances raising significant safety concerns, cited generally as immunogenicity, impurities and limited human data — and although it was subsequently removed from that list in September 2024, the removal followed the nominator withdrawing the nomination, not any safety clearance. It is not among the peptides scheduled for Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee review, which leaves it simply outside the compounding framework altogether.

It should not be confused with tesamorelin (Egrifta), a distinct FDA-approved GHRH(1-44) analogue for HIV-associated lipodystrophy, nor with sermorelin, the unmodified GHRH(1-29) that this molecule is a substituted version of. Both conflations are common in vendor copy and both smuggle an approved-drug frame onto an unapproved one.

Last checked: July 2026.

Sourcing, Route & Legal Status

Regulatory status. Unapproved research chemical. Neither the no-DAC form here nor the DAC sibling holds marketing authorization from the FDA, EMA, TGA or any other regulator, for any indication — and unlike Semax or cerebrolysin, there is no country where it is an approved prescription medicine either. It was an investigational compound whose only registered trial was terminated in 2006 and never resumed. It is sold exclusively as “for research use only / not for human consumption,” which is the legally accurate frame for anyone acquiring it. It is WADA-prohibited (S2) in and out of competition, and as of this pass it sits outside the US compounding framework (see Clinical & regulatory status). It is not a US-scheduled controlled substance — but “not scheduled” is not “approved,” and marketing it for human use is unlawful in most Western jurisdictions.

How it’s supplied & administered. Vials of lyophilized powder, reconstituted by the user with bacteriostatic water and injected subcutaneously. The no-DAC form is short-acting and is therefore dosed frequently — typically multiple times daily in community protocols — and usually paired with a ghrelin-mimetic GHRP such as ipamorelin, on the reasoning that the two act at different receptors. The DAC form’s whole selling point is the opposite: weekly-ish dosing. There is no oral route, no intranasal route, and no transdermal route that delivers intact peptide.

Sourcing reality (this is a safety issue, not a footnote). These vials come from unregulated vendors with no manufacturing oversight and no regulatory accountability. Identity is a documented problem rather than a theoretical one: CJC-1295 has been identified by forensic analysts in an unknown, unlabeled pharmaceutical preparation ^{9Reference 9Henninge J et al. · 2010Identification of CJC-1295, a growth-hormone-releasing peptide, in an unknown pharmaceutical preparation — forensic identificationView study →}, and studies of internet doping markets show peptides of this class moving through ad-hoc websites and direct messaging with no chain of custody ^{14Reference 14Pineau T et al. · 2016The study of doping market: how to produce intelligence from Internet forums — forensic / market analysisView study →}. Correct sequence, actual peptide content, absence of process impurities, and — most consequentially for an injected product — absence of bacterial endotoxin cannot be assumed. The no-DAC/DAC confusion compounds this: a vial labeled “CJC-1295” may contain either molecule, with half-lives differing by two orders of magnitude, and the buyer has no way to tell. Third-party certificates of analysis (independent HPLC identity/purity plus endotoxin testing) are the only partial mitigation, and a COA supplied by the seller is not independent verification. No vendor is recommended or linked here.

Safety

There is no controlled human safety study of the no-DAC form at any dose, for any duration — so everything below is class- and mechanism-level reasoning, not a measured adverse-effect profile for this molecule.

Safety at a Glance

❔ Toxicity unknown

• No safety data for the molecule here. The small pharmacology studies that exist were done on the DAC sibling and were not designed as safety trials.
• Sustained IGF-1 elevation is the substantive concern. It underpins the general neoplasia caution attached to GH-axis manipulation — a plausibility argument, never studied here.
• Never assessed in pregnancy or breastfeeding. No human or animal reproductive data of any kind — see the box below.
• Dysglycemia is the predictable metabolic risk. Growth hormone opposes insulin, so caution with insulin and other antidiabetic agents.
• Product risks may exceed pharmacological ones. Non-sterile reconstitution, endotoxin, mislabeled peptide and self-mixed dosing errors are documented failure modes.

Full Safety & Interactions Detail

Overall posture. There is no controlled safety study of the no-DAC form in humans — none, at any dose, for any duration. The DAC-form pharmacology studies reported no serious adverse events at research doses ^{1Reference 1Teichman SL et al. · 2006RCTProlonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults — human (RCT)View study →}, but they were small, short, conducted in healthy volunteers, and not designed or powered as safety trials; and the only larger trial that ran was stopped after a participant death whose causality was never established (see Clinical & regulatory status). Everything below is therefore class- and mechanism-level reasoning, labeled as such, not a characterized adverse-effect profile for this molecule.

Expected effects (inferred from the GHRH-analogue class). Injection-site reactions, transient flushing, headache, fluid retention, and arthralgia/myalgia are the effects reported across GH-axis peptides and would be expected here ^{15,16,17Reference 15Dominikowski A et al. · 2026ReviewThe emerging landscape of performance-enhancing peptides modulating GH-IGF1 axis: bridging the gap between clinical evidence and patient self-administration — reviewView study →Reference 16Mendias CL · 2026ReviewSafety and efficacy of approved and unapproved peptide therapies for musculoskeletal injuries and athletic performance — reviewView study →Reference 17Villegas Meza AD et al. · 2026ReviewInjectable peptides in sports medicine: a structured narrative review of evidence, safety, and antidoping implications — reviewView study →}. Because GH is counter-regulatory to insulin, dysglycemia and reduced insulin sensitivity are the mechanistically predictable concern with sustained stimulation — notably, tesamorelin at approved doses did not impair insulin sensitivity in healthy men ^{6Reference 6Stanley TL et al. · 2011Clinical trialEffects of a growth hormone-releasing hormone analog on endogenous GH pulsatility and insulin sensitivity in healthy men — human (clinical trial; tesamorelin)View study →}, which is reassuring for the class but is a finding about a different, dose-controlled drug.

The IGF-1 question, and why the DAC/no-DAC split matters here too. The substantive theoretical concern with this family is not acute toxicity but sustained, non-pulsatile IGF-1 elevation — the pattern the DAC form produces by design, holding IGF-1 above baseline for weeks ^{1Reference 1Teichman SL et al. · 2006RCTProlonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults — human (RCT)View study →}. Chronically elevated IGF-1 is the mechanistic basis for the general neoplasia caution attached to GH-axis manipulation; it is a plausibility argument drawn from endocrinology, not a demonstrated cancer risk for CJC-1295, and no study has ever looked. The no-DAC form’s shorter action is the intended answer to this, but since its pharmacokinetics have never been measured in humans, the mitigation is assumed rather than shown.

Interactions. No controlled human interaction studies exist for either form. Mechanistically: caution with insulin and other antidiabetic agents (GH opposes insulin action), with corticosteroids (which blunt GH secretion), and with anything else acting on the GH/IGF-1 axis, including exogenous HGH and co-administered secretagogues. Stacking with a GHRP such as ipamorelin is the common community practice and is an unstudied combination — two receptors driven at once, with no trial data on the combined endocrine effect.

Injection- and product-specific risks may exceed the pharmacological ones. Non-sterile reconstitution technique, contaminated or endotoxin-bearing product, mislabeled or misidentified peptide, and dosing errors from self-mixed concentrations are concrete, documented failure modes in the research-peptide market — and unlike the drug’s own effects, they do not require any pharmacology to hurt someone.

Who should avoid it. Anyone pregnant, breastfeeding or trying to conceive; anyone with active or prior malignancy, or a significant family cancer history (the IGF-1 caution); anyone with diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance; children and adolescents; competitive athletes subject to anti-doping testing; and anyone unwilling to accept an unapproved product of unverifiable identity and purity.

Scope disclosure (honesty, not a claim):

• Human data? None for the molecule here. Three small pharmacology studies exist for the DAC sibling in healthy adults, plus one terminated Phase 2. No human trial of the no-DAC form has ever been conducted.
• Interactions assessed? No. Only mechanism-level cautions (insulin/antidiabetics, corticosteroids, GH-axis drugs, GHRP stacking) — inferred, not tested.
• Pregnancy/lactation assessed? No — no human or animal reproductive data located.
• Long-term safety established? No. No long-term human data exists for either form, and the longest exposure ever studied was a matter of weeks.
• Half-life verified? No — not for this form. The commonly quoted ~30 minutes has no trial behind it.

Never imply safety from silence. Where CJC-1295 has not been studied — interactions, pregnancy, long-term use, cancer risk, gray-market product purity, and the pharmacokinetics of the no-DAC form itself — the correct statement is “not assessed,” not “safe.”

Pregnancy & Lactation

? Not established in pregnancy? Not established in lactation

Not assessed / not established. There are no human pregnancy or lactation data and no reproductive-toxicity studies for CJC-1295 in either form. Treat as contraindicated by default in pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Dosage

There is no established human dose for CJC-1295 in any form, and none is recommended here. It is not an approved medicine or supplement anywhere, no dose-finding study of the no-DAC form has ever been performed, and everything below is reported as data for context, not as a protocol.

The only human dosing figures that come from controlled research belong to the DAC form: single subcutaneous doses of 30–60 µg/kg in the ascending-dose pharmacology studies ^{1Reference 1Teichman SL et al. · 2006RCTProlonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults — human (RCT)View study →}, and 60 or 90 µg/kg in the pulsatility study ^{2Reference 2Ionescu M · 2006Clinical trialPulsatile secretion of growth hormone (GH) persists during continuous stimulation by CJC-1295, a long-acting GH-releasing hormone analog — human (clinical trial)View study →}. Those were supervised research doses of a long-acting molecule, administered to healthy volunteers under monitoring, and they do not translate to the short-acting form here — the whole pharmacokinetic premise is different.

For the no-DAC form, the figures circulating in peptide communities (commonly around 100 µg per injection, often several times daily, and typically stacked with ipamorelin) derive from vendor copy and forum consensus, not from any trial. They are recorded here as a sociological fact about what people do, not laundered into a dose. There is no validated human dose, no established schedule, no verified bioavailability figure to anchor one, and no basis for a maintenance regimen. Oral products cannot work regardless of the number on the label (see Pharmacokinetics). This entry is informational only.

References

1. Teichman SL, Neale A, Lawrence B, Gagnon C, Castaigne JP, Frohman LA. (2006). Prolonged stimulation of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I secretion by CJC-1295, a long-acting analog of GH-releasing hormone, in healthy adults — human (RCT). Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16352683/
2. Ionescu M, Frohman LA. (2006). Pulsatile secretion of growth hormone (GH) persists during continuous stimulation by CJC-1295, a long-acting GH-releasing hormone analog — human (clinical trial). Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17018654/
3. Sackmann-Sala L, Ding J, Frohman LA, Kopchick JJ. (2009). Activation of the GH/IGF-1 axis by CJC-1295, a long-acting GHRH analog, results in serum protein profile changes in normal adult subjects — human. Growth Hormone & IGF Research. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19386527/
4. Jetté L, Léger R, Thibaudeau K, et al. (2005). Human growth hormone-releasing factor (hGRF)1-29-albumin bioconjugates activate the GRF receptor on the anterior pituitary in rats: identification of CJC-1295 as a long-lasting GRF analog — animal (rat) / in vitro. Endocrinology. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15817669/
5. Alba M, Fintini D, Sagazio A, et al. (2006). Once-daily administration of CJC-1295, a long-acting growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) analog, normalizes growth in the GHRH knockout mouse — animal (mouse). American Journal of Physiology: Endocrinology and Metabolism. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16822960/
6. Stanley TL, Chen CY, Branch KL, Makimura H, Grinspoon SK. (2011). Effects of a growth hormone-releasing hormone analog on endogenous GH pulsatility and insulin sensitivity in healthy men — human (clinical trial; tesamorelin). Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20943777/
7. Baker LD, Barsness SM, Borson S, et al. (2012). Effects of growth hormone-releasing hormone on cognitive function in adults with mild cognitive impairment and healthy older adults — human (RCT; tesamorelin). Archives of Neurology. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22869065/
8. Khorram O, Yeung M, Vu L, Yen SS. (1997). Effects of [norleucine27]growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) (1-29)-NH2 administration on the immune system of aging men and women — human (RCT). Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9360512/
9. Henninge J, Pepaj M, Hullstein I, Hemmersbach P. (2010). Identification of CJC-1295, a growth-hormone-releasing peptide, in an unknown pharmaceutical preparation — forensic identification. Drug Testing and Analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21204297/
10. Memdouh S, Gavrilović I, Ng K, Cowan D. (2021). Advances in the detection of growth hormone releasing hormone synthetic analogs — analytical review. Drug Testing and Analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34665524/
11. Uçaktürk E, Nemutlu E. (2026). Analysis of growth hormone releasing hormone and its analogs in urine using nano liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole/orbitrap mass spectrometry — analytical method (human matrix). Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41138283/
12. Timms M, Ganio K, Steel R. (2019). A method for confirming CJC-1295 abuse in equine plasma samples by LC-MS/MS — analytical method (equine). Drug Testing and Analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30938069/
13. Van Hout MC, Hearne E. (2016). Netnography of female use of the synthetic growth hormone CJC-1295: pulses and potions — qualitative / netnographic study. Substance Use & Misuse. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26771670/
14. Pineau T, Schopfer A, Grossrieder L, et al. (2016). The study of doping market: how to produce intelligence from Internet forums — forensic / market analysis. Forensic Science International. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27710891/
15. Dominikowski A, Rękoś Z, Olejarz M, et al. (2026). The emerging landscape of performance-enhancing peptides modulating GH-IGF1 axis: bridging the gap between clinical evidence and patient self-administration — review. Frontiers in Endocrinology. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42395176/
16. Mendias CL, Awan TM. (2026). Safety and efficacy of approved and unapproved peptide therapies for musculoskeletal injuries and athletic performance — review. Sports Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41966639/
17. Villegas Meza AD, Nocek M, Mitchell BC, Lizarraga M. (2026). Injectable peptides in sports medicine: a structured narrative review of evidence, safety, and antidoping implications — review. JBJS Reviews. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42160466/

View all 17 references▾