PMID-41966639 – Peptide Therapies for Musculoskeletal and Athletic Performance
Mendias CL, et al. Peptide therapies for musculoskeletal conditions and athletic performance: a narrative review. Sports Med. 2026. DOI: 10.1007/s40279-026-02437-0.
Quick Reference
| Property | Value |
|---|---|
| PMID | 41966639 |
| DOI | 10.1007/s40279-026-02437-0 |
| Year | 2026 |
| Journal | Sports Medicine |
| Study Type | Narrative Review |
| Evidence Level | V |
| Sample | Review covering 10 peptides used in sports medicine contexts |
| Peptide(s) Studied | AOD-9604, CJC-1295 NO DAC, Ipamorelin |
Key Findings
- Comprehensive review evaluating evidence for 10 peptides commonly used in sports medicine and musculoskeletal practice
- AOD9604 was noted to have favorable preclinical results for body composition and potential chondroprotective effects
- Limited human safety and efficacy data remain a significant gap for AOD9604 in the sports medicine context
- CJC-1295 and ipamorelin reviewed as GH secretagogues with theoretical benefits for tissue repair and recovery
- The review broadly concluded that most peptides used in sports medicine lack robust human clinical trial data
- Called for well-designed RCTs to establish efficacy and safety profiles before widespread clinical adoption
Study Design
Narrative review of the published literature on peptide therapies relevant to musculoskeletal conditions, tissue repair, and athletic performance. Evaluated preclinical and clinical evidence for each peptide, including mechanism of action, efficacy data, safety profiles, and regulatory status.
Limitations
- Narrative review methodology (not systematic) introduces selection bias
- Could not perform quantitative synthesis or meta-analysis due to heterogeneity of evidence
- Some peptides had very limited published data to review
- Did not include unpublished clinical trial data or real-world evidence from practitioners
Clinical Relevance
This is a timely and high-impact review from a respected sports medicine journal that provides clinicians with a balanced assessment of peptide therapies. It validates the growing clinical interest in AOD9604, CJC-1295, and ipamorelin while responsibly noting the evidence gaps. Practitioners should use this review to contextualize their use of these peptides and to counsel patients about the current evidence base. The call for more rigorous clinical trials reflects the maturation of the peptide therapy field.
Related
#research #narrative-review #AOD-9604 #CJC-1295 #ipamorelin #evidence-level-V