GROWTH HORMONE AXIS
Growth Hormone Axis Research Peptides
A structured literature review of three research peptides studied for the GH/IGF-1 axis — tesamorelin, MOTS-c and CJC-1295 — with citations, plain-English summaries, and no products.


Tesamorelin
The lead compound on this desk — an FDA-approved synthetic GHRH analogue with the most rigorous human evidence of the three, studied for visceral-fat reduction in HIV-associated lipodystrophy.
Read the research →
MOTS-c
A 16-amino-acid peptide encoded in the mitochondrial genome, studied for AMPK-mediated glucose handling, skeletal-muscle function and physical performance — mostly in animal models.
Read the research →
CJC-1295
A long-acting GHRH analogue built to extend the plasma half-life of a 29-residue growth-hormone-releasing peptide. Never approved; studied in healthy adults for GH and IGF-1 elevation.
Read the research →The short version
Peptide Research Protocols is a reading desk, not a store. It collects what the published literature actually says about three peptides that appear frequently in research on the growth hormone axis: tesamorelin, MOTS-c and CJC-1295. A peptide is a short chain of amino acids — the same building blocks that make up proteins, only far smaller. Each of these three has been studied because it interacts, directly or indirectly, with the signalling pathway that controls growth hormone output and downstream metabolic effects.
Tesamorelin is the lead: it is the only FDA-approved compound of the three, cleared for a specific HIV-related indication, and it has the deepest controlled human trial record here [1][6]. MOTS-c comes from an unexpected place — a small open reading frame inside the mitochondrial genome — and is studied as a metabolic regulator and exercise-mimetic, almost entirely in animals [10][11]. CJC-1295 is a synthetic, long-acting GHRH analogue designed to extend the window of GH stimulation; it has never been approved and its human data are limited to early pharmacokinetic studies [16][17].
This digest does one job: it tells you, in plain language and with citations, what each peptide was tested on, in which species, and how far that evidence actually reaches. None of these is presented here with a human dose, and none of this is medical advice.
What are research peptides?
Proteins in the body — a signalling hormone, a structural scaffold, an enzyme — are long chains of amino acids folded into a specific shape. A peptide is a much shorter chain of the same amino acids, sometimes only a handful of residues. Because they are small and specific, peptides can act like precision keys for particular cellular receptors, switching certain processes on or off.
A research peptide is one that has been synthesized and studied in the laboratory — in cell cultures, in animals, or occasionally in early human pilots — but has not been approved by a regulator as a medicine for general use. Sellers describe such compounds as being for laboratory research only. That framing matters: it means that dosing, long-term safety and real-world effectiveness in people are usually not established from controlled human trials. When this site reports a number, it reports it the way the study did — for example, 2 mg/day subcutaneously in HIV-infected adults — never as a recommendation. Tesamorelin is an exception to the "research-only" generalization: it is an approved prescription drug, but only for a specific, narrow indication, and that boundary is kept in view throughout its page.
How these three fit into growth hormone axis research
The three peptides on this desk all connect to the GH/IGF-1 axis, but they do so through different mechanisms and come with very different evidence portfolios — which is precisely why they sit together.
- Tesamorelin is the lead. It is a 44-amino-acid synthetic analogue of the body's own growth hormone-releasing hormone, modified at the N-terminus to resist enzymatic breakdown. Binding the GHRH receptor on pituitary somatotroph cells, it stimulates pulsatile growth hormone release, which drives hepatic IGF-1 production and preferential lipolysis of visceral fat. A 2026 meta-analysis of five RCTs found visceral fat reduced by a mean of 27.71 cm² [1]; the pivotal Phase 3 RCT showed a 15.2% reduction versus a 5.0% increase in placebo [6].
- MOTS-c is the most scientifically novel of the three. It is encoded not in the nuclear genome but inside the mitochondrial 12S rRNA gene, which makes it a mitochondrial-derived peptide — a category that barely existed before 2015. Its primary studied action is AMPK activation via folate-cycle inhibition, improving glucose handling and insulin sensitivity in skeletal muscle [10]. Under metabolic stress it translocates to the nucleus and regulates antioxidant-response genes [12]. Human data are limited to a biomarker association study in haemodialysis patients [9].
- CJC-1295 is the least well-documented of the three in human studies. It is an engineered 29-residue GHRH analogue carrying four substitutions for protease resistance plus, in its DAC form, an albumin-binding moiety that extends half-life to roughly six to eight days [16]. A single dose in healthy adults elevated mean GH for more than six days and IGF-1 for nine to eleven days [16], and GH pulsatility was preserved [17]. It has never been approved by any regulator and is prohibited in sport under WADA Section S2.
Together they map the GH axis from three directions: pituitary stimulation (tesamorelin), mitochondrial metabolic regulation (MOTS-c) and long-acting GHRH pharmacology (CJC-1295). Use the directory to read each compound's page, or compare these peptides side by side.
A note on how this desk reads the literature
Peptide Research Protocols is a cross-referenced literature digest. Each compound page summarizes the peer-reviewed studies for that peptide, cites them by number, and links to a single shared references list that aggregates every source across all three. Where the evidence is preclinical, single-lab, or rests on a narrow approved indication rather than general use, the page says so plainly — that contextual caution is part of the scientific record, not a caveat tucked away at the bottom. The aim is a precise, accurate map of what is known about each compound so you can see where the evidence is strong, where it is preliminary, and where it is essentially absent.