Why combine a GHRH analogue with a secretagogue?

Because they act at different receptors — the GHRH receptor and the ghrelin receptor — so the two inputs to the pituitary are independent. It is the strongest mechanistic rationale of any blend here, and it has not been tested as a combination.

Has the CJC-1295 / ipamorelin combination been trialled?

No published trial of the pairing exists. The trials that exist studied each compound separately.

What did the ipamorelin human trial find?

It was negative on efficacy. A phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled trial in 117 bowel-resection patients did not meet its primary endpoint, though tolerability was reassuring.

Does the CJC-1295 human trial apply to this blend?

Not directly. The well-known 2006 trial studied CJC-1295 with DAC, which persists for days; the no-DAC form in this vial is cleared in roughly half an hour. They are pharmacokinetically different compounds.

Is this blend an approved medicine?

No, and neither component holds a marketing authorisation anywhere. It is supplied here as a laboratory reagent for research use only.

Research guides

CJC-1295 and ipamorelin: what the research says

Two receptors, one gland — the most coherent blend rationale here, and still no published trial of the pairing. What each component's evidence actually shows.

Available in the catalogue

Supplied as research material. Sizes and pricing are on the product page. Availability is not a statement about what a compound does.

CJC-1295 NO DAC + IPAMORELIN
Growth Hormone

Of the blends here this is the one whose rationale holds together best, which makes it the one where the distinction between a good hypothesis and a tested result matters most.

What is in the vial

CJC-1295 no-DAC, a GHRH analogue with four substitutions that resist enzymatic breakdown, and ipamorelin, a selective growth hormone secretagogue developed at Novo Nordisk.

The rationale, which is a real one

The two reach the pituitary through genuinely different receptors: CJC-1295 no-DAC at the GHRH receptor, ipamorelin at the ghrelin receptor. Pairing a GHRH analogue with a secretagogue is a long-standing idea in growth hormone physiology precisely because the two inputs are independent, and that is a stronger mechanistic argument than any other blend in this catalogue can make.

It remains an argument. The published trials studied each compound on its own, and no trial of the pairing has been published.

What the component evidence actually says

This is where the blend gets more interesting than its marketing. Ipamorelin's one completed, published randomised controlled trial in humans — in postoperative ileus — did not meet its primary endpoint. And the best-known human trial of CJC-1295, Teichman 2006, studied the with-DAC form, which has a completely different pharmacokinetic profile from the no-DAC form in this vial.

So the blend combines a compound whose only human efficacy trial was negative with a compound whose headline human trial was of a different version of itself. Neither fact is a reason the mechanism is wrong; both are reasons to be precise about what has been shown.

What studies reported

Each entry states what a study examined and the model it used. Nothing below describes an outcome for a person.

Everything below is drawn from published research, and each entry names the model the study used. Approval status varies by compound and by country, and nothing described here is supplied as a medicine or for use in a person.

Adverse and null findings reported

No dedicated safety study has been published for this compound. That is not a finding that none exists — it means the question has not been asked in print, and the gaps below say so.

What the research does not establish

An absence cannot be cited, so these are stated plainly. They are the part of the picture that silence would otherwise hide.

No published study investigates this combination. Everything known about the contents of this vial comes from work on the individual components, tested separately.
The non-overlapping receptor rationale is mechanistically sound and untested as a combination. No published trial has compared the pairing against either component alone.
Ipamorelin's only published randomised controlled trial in humans did not meet its primary endpoint. That result belongs in any honest description of a product containing it.
The best-known human trial of CJC-1295 studied the with-DAC form, whose half-life is measured in days rather than in the region of half an hour. Its findings should not be read across to the no-DAC form in this vial.
No published work establishes a basis for the ratio in which the two are combined.
No published study addresses what sustained stimulation of the growth hormone axis through two receptors at once does over time.

Common questions

Why combine a GHRH analogue with a secretagogue?: Because they act at different receptors — the GHRH receptor and the ghrelin receptor — so the two inputs to the pituitary are independent. It is the strongest mechanistic rationale of any blend here, and it has not been tested as a combination.
Has the CJC-1295 / ipamorelin combination been trialled?: No published trial of the pairing exists. The trials that exist studied each compound separately.
What did the ipamorelin human trial find?: It was negative on efficacy. A phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled trial in 117 bowel-resection patients did not meet its primary endpoint, though tolerability was reassuring.
Does the CJC-1295 human trial apply to this blend?: Not directly. The well-known 2006 trial studied CJC-1295 with DAC, which persists for days; the no-DAC form in this vial is cleared in roughly half an hour. They are pharmacokinetically different compounds.
Is this blend an approved medicine?: No, and neither component holds a marketing authorisation anywhere. It is supplied here as a laboratory reagent for research use only.

Compounds covered

The reference page for each compound this article discusses.

CJC-1295 no-DAC / Ipamorelin Mix

CJC-1295 (Mod GRF 1-29): what the research says
The best-known CJC-1295 human trial studied the DAC form, not the no-DAC form sold as Mod GRF 1-29. Why the two have very different pharmacokinetics.
Ipamorelin: what the research says
A selective growth hormone secretagogue with a completed, published human trial. It missed its primary endpoint, and that is the most useful result it has.
Tesamorelin (Egrifta): what the research says
An approved medicine in the US with one of the largest trial programmes here. Every efficacy trial was in HIV-associated visceral fat, and that limits it.

About this article

Everything reported here comes from published research, and each finding names the model the study used — cell culture, rat, or human. Findings in one model do not transfer to another, most of the work described is preclinical, and none of it is a claim that a compound is safe or effective for any purpose. Nothing on this page describes doses, routes of administration, or use in a person.

Approval status varies by compound and by country. A few of the substances described are the active ingredient of medicines authorised in the EU; most have no marketing authorisation anywhere and have never been assessed by a regulator. Neither is supplied as a medicine here. All material supplied by ASSAY is sold for in-vitro laboratory research only, and is not a drug, food, cosmetic or medical device, and not for human or veterinary use.

All guides