Vol. 4, No. 33 — Week of September 8 Independent research-compound journalism, since 2022
Research Compound Weekly
Reporting and reader dispatches from the peptide & research-compound world
Research Compound Weekly / Research Library

The Primary Literature

Every compound we cover eventually traces back to real published research — real authors, real journals, real data. This page collects the actual papers behind our reporting, linked directly to their sources, so you can read past our summary if you want to. Every citation below is a genuine, verifiable publication.

Papers Behind Our Reporting

7 sources
BPC-157

Staresinic M, Sebecic B, Patrlj L, et al. “Gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 accelerates healing of transected rat Achilles tendon and in vitro stimulates tendocytes growth.” Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 2003;21:976–983.

The foundational tendon-healing study behind most of BPC-157’s research reputation. Rats with surgically transected Achilles tendons healed faster with BPC-157 treatment, and the compound directly stimulated tendon cell growth in vitro.

Read the source → See our coverage →
Tirzepatide (triple-agonist family)

Rosenstock J, Wysham C, Frías JP, et al. “Efficacy and safety of a novel dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide in patients with type 2 diabetes (SURPASS-1): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial.” The Lancet, 2021;398:143–155.

The first Phase 3 trial in the SURPASS program — the human trial data underlying the dual and triple-agonist mechanism discussed in our GLP-1/GIP/glucagon coverage.

Read the source → See our coverage →
NAD+

Covarrubias AJ, Perrone R, Grozio A, Verdin E. “NAD+ metabolism and its roles in cellular processes during ageing.” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 2021;22:119–141.

The review that anchors most current discussion of NAD+ decline with age — documents the decline itself rigorously while being notably more cautious than marketing copy about what reversing it actually accomplishes.

Read the source → See our coverage →
KPV

Dalmasso G, Charrier-Hisamuddin L, Nguyen HT, Yan Y, Sitaraman S, Merlin D. “PepT1-mediated tripeptide KPV uptake reduces intestinal inflammation.” Gastroenterology, 2008;134(1):166–178.

The landmark paper identifying how KPV actually gets into cells (the PepT1 transporter, not a melanocortin receptor) and demonstrating reduced inflammation in two standard mouse colitis models.

Read the source → See our coverage →
CJC-1295

Teichman SL, Neale A, Lawrence B, Gagnon C, Castaigne JP, Frohman LA. “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.” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2006;91(3):799–805.

The only substantial human trial behind CJC-1295 — a Phase 1 pharmacodynamics study, not an efficacy trial. Confirms the mechanism works in humans; doesn’t establish outcomes beyond GH and IGF-1 elevation.

Read the source → See our coverage →
Tesamorelin

Falutz J, Allas S, Blot K, et al. “Metabolic effects of a growth hormone–releasing factor in patients with HIV.” New England Journal of Medicine, 2007;357:2359–2370.

The pivotal FDA-approval trial. 412 patients, randomized and placebo-controlled, 26 weeks — the kind of trial design most compounds in this newsletter’s coverage simply don’t have behind them yet.

Read the source → See our coverage →
GHK-Cu

Pickart L, Vasquez-Soltero JM, Margolina A. “GHK Peptide as a Natural Modulator of Multiple Cellular Pathways in Skin Regeneration.” BioMed Research International, 2015;648108.

A review from the researcher who originally isolated GHK in 1973, summarizing five decades of collagen and wound-healing research — among the longest-running research threads of any compound this newsletter covers.

Read the source → See our coverage →

Reader Research Notes

Not every useful observation comes from a peer-reviewed journal. These are informal notes from readers doing their own tracking and comparisons — personal, anecdotal, and clearly not a substitute for the literature above. Have a research note of your own? Send it in.

Tracking reconstitution stability past the usual month

Kept three vials of the same reconstituted batch under identical refrigeration and logged when each one visually changed (slight cloudiness) relative to how many times it left the fridge. The one opened daily changed noticeably sooner than the one left mostly undisturbed — consistent with what the storage-mistakes piece described, for what an informal home log is worth.

Reader note, submitted by a longtime subscriber

Comparing two COAs from the same lot, six weeks apart

Ordered from the same listed lot twice, six weeks apart, and requested COAs both times. Purity matched within 0.1%, but the second COA had a sterility result the first one listed as pending. Filed away as one small, informal data point on how often “pending” actually does get updated.

Reader note, submitted anonymously

A simple log template that’s made record-keeping less painful

After reading the COA explainer, built a plain spreadsheet with one row per order: lot code, sample code, dates, purity, and a link to the saved COA PDF. Nothing sophisticated — but having six months of orders in one place made comparing suppliers actually possible instead of relying on memory.

Reader note, submitted by a reader in our Letters inbox