BPC-157
updated
What is BPC-157?
BPC-157 is a 15-amino-acid experimental peptide also called PL 14736 or Bepecin in parts of its development record. A vial sold under the name is not automatically the same formulation or quality as the material used in a paper.
Animal and cell studies report improved repair across tendon, ligament, muscle, gut, nerve and vascular injury models. Human evidence is limited to uncontrolled knee-pain and bladder studies plus a two-person intravenous safety pilot. These studies did not test tendon healing, systemic recovery, or long-term safety.
experimental pentadecapeptide
- 15-amino-acid experimental peptide
- No FDA-approved BPC-157 drug
- Published human evidence consists of small uncontrolled reports and a two-person safety pilot
- Banned in tested sport under WADA S0
What exactly is BPC-157?
BPC-157 is a 15-amino-acid experimental peptide also called PL 14736 or Bepecin in parts of its development record. A vial sold under the name is not automatically the same formulation or quality as the material used in a paper.
The public literature uses free-base, salt, development-code, and product names inconsistently. That matters because sequence identity, counter-ion, concentration, degradation products, sterility, and endotoxin burden can all change what was actually administered.
FDA 2026 briefing · evidence and safety review
FDA staff briefing document
US Food and Drug Administration, July 2026.
FDA staff described nomenclature and formulation uncertainty, found the pharmacology largely limited to animal work, found insufficient clinical safety information for proposed routes, and recommended against placing BPC-157 on the 503A bulks list. The committee process is advisory and does not approve a drug.
- Study design
- Regulatory evidence review
The July advisory process did not create FDA approval or automatically authorize compounding.
Read the original sourceHas BPC-157 been studied in people?
Yes, but the record is small and uncontrolled. Published reports cover knee pain, interstitial cystitis, and a two-person intravenous safety pilot. None is a randomized efficacy trial, and none proves tendon healing.
| Report | People | What it can answer |
|---|---|---|
| Knee chart review | 16 reached for follow-up | Self-reported pain after intra-articular BPC-157, with four also receiving TB4 |
| Bladder pilot | 12 women | Symptoms after one intravesical administration, without a control group |
| IV safety pilot | 2 previously exposed adults | Short-term measurements after two IV infusions, with no efficacy endpoint |
These reports are not interchangeable across route, condition, or product.
Does the knee series show that BPC-157 repairs tissue?
No. It collected retrospective pain reports by telephone. It did not use a control group, validated functional measures, or imaging to show cartilage, tendon, or ligament repair.
Knee series · BPC alone and BPC plus TB4
Retrospective case series
Lee E, Padgett B. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2021.
Sixteen of 17 treated patients were reached by telephone. Twelve had received BPC-157 alone and four had received BPC-157 plus TB4. Eleven of 12 in the BPC-only group and three of four in the combination group reported significant pain improvement. The review used no control group, validated outcome instrument, imaging confirmation, or fixed follow-up schedule.
- Participants / model
- 17 people treated for varied knee-pain diagnoses; 16 reached for follow-up
- Treatment
- Intra-articular BPC-157, alone or with a separate TB4 injection
- Follow-up
- Chart review covering one year; follow-up timing varied
- Study design
- Single-clinic retrospective telephone follow-up
Pain reports cannot establish structural repair, comparative benefit, or the contribution of TB4.
Read the original sourceAre human trials registered?
Yes, but none supplies a positive clinical result. The older oral phase 1 record has no posted results, the completed gummy study is open-label with no posted results, and the Arkansas surgical registry record lists it as not yet recruiting. The Hudson entry belongs to a cluster containing fictional, mock, and copied trial records.
ClinicalTrials.gov · four exact intervention records
Registry record set
ClinicalTrials.gov records.
ClinicalTrials.gov listed four records under the exact names and aliases: dormant oral phase 1 record NCT02637284 with no posted results; completed open-label gummy study NCT07752381 with no posted results; not-yet-recruiting Arkansas rotator-cuff study NCT07803250; and Hudson Biotech record NCT07437547. The Hudson record sits in a sponsor batch containing records that call themselves fictional or mock and others that copy unrelated Lilly identifiers, so it is treated as a registry anomaly rather than proof of an operating trial.
- Study design
- Four ClinicalTrials.gov records under exact names and aliases, with sponsor-batch consistency assessment
Registry status is sponsor-reported. A registration is not a result, peer review, approval, or proof that recruitment occurred.
Read the original sourceKnee series · BPC alone and BPC plus TB4
Retrospective case series
Lee E, Padgett B. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2021.
Sixteen of 17 treated patients were reached by telephone. Twelve had received BPC-157 alone and four had received BPC-157 plus TB4. Eleven of 12 in the BPC-only group and three of four in the combination group reported significant pain improvement. The review used no control group, validated outcome instrument, imaging confirmation, or fixed follow-up schedule.
- Participants / model
- 17 people treated for varied knee-pain diagnoses; 16 reached for follow-up
- Treatment
- Intra-articular BPC-157, alone or with a separate TB4 injection
- Follow-up
- Chart review covering one year; follow-up timing varied
- Study design
- Single-clinic retrospective telephone follow-up
Pain reports cannot establish structural repair, comparative benefit, or the contribution of TB4.
Read the original sourceBladder pilot · uncontrolled human report
Uncontrolled pilot study
Lee E, Walker C, Ayadi B. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2024.
Twelve women with interstitial cystitis received one bladder instillation during cystoscopy. The paper reports large self-reported symptom improvements and no adverse events, but it had no comparator, blinded assessment, or replication.
- Participants / model
- 12 women with moderate-to-severe interstitial cystitis that had not responded to pentosan polysulfate
- Treatment
- One 10 mg intravesical administration during cystoscopy
- Follow-up
- Single administration with follow-up reported by the authors
- Study design
- Single-site uncontrolled pilot
This route and condition do not establish oral or subcutaneous effects.
Read the original sourceIV pilot · two previously exposed adults
Pilot safety report
Lee E, Burgess K. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2025.
A 58-year-old man and 68-year-old woman, both previously exposed to intravenous BPC-157, received 10 mg and then 20 mg on consecutive days. The authors reported no self-reported adverse events or material changes in the measured vital signs and laboratory markers. With two re-exposed participants and no comparator, this cannot establish general or long-term safety.
- Participants / model
- Two adults with prior intravenous BPC-157 exposure
- Treatment
- 10 mg then 20 mg intravenously over one hour on consecutive days
- Follow-up
- Two treatment days with short-term measurements
- Study design
- Uncontrolled safety pilot
The two-person pilot had no efficacy endpoint and could not characterize uncommon or delayed harms.
Read the original sourceClinicalTrials.gov · four exact intervention records
Registry record set
ClinicalTrials.gov records.
ClinicalTrials.gov listed four records under the exact names and aliases: dormant oral phase 1 record NCT02637284 with no posted results; completed open-label gummy study NCT07752381 with no posted results; not-yet-recruiting Arkansas rotator-cuff study NCT07803250; and Hudson Biotech record NCT07437547. The Hudson record sits in a sponsor batch containing records that call themselves fictional or mock and others that copy unrelated Lilly identifiers, so it is treated as a registry anomaly rather than proof of an operating trial.
- Study design
- Four ClinicalTrials.gov records under exact names and aliases, with sponsor-batch consistency assessment
Registry status is sponsor-reported. A registration is not a result, peer review, approval, or proof that recruitment occurred.
Read the original sourceWhat do the injury-repair studies show?
Multiple animal and cell studies report effects on tendon, ligament, muscle, gut, nerve, and vascular injury models. Those findings justify research interest, but they do not establish an effective dose, route, or clinical outcome in people.
The tendon paper measured rat-cell migration and outgrowth plus findings in injured rats. It does not show that a subcutaneous vial heals a human rotator cuff or Achilles tendon.
Is the mechanism settled?
No. Papers report changes in nitric-oxide, angiogenesis, cell-migration, and growth-factor pathways, but FDA’s 2026 review described the mechanism and human relevance as unresolved. BPC-157 is not established as a selective ligand with one validated clinical target.
FDA 2026 briefing · evidence and safety review
FDA staff briefing document
US Food and Drug Administration, July 2026.
FDA staff described nomenclature and formulation uncertainty, found the pharmacology largely limited to animal work, found insufficient clinical safety information for proposed routes, and recommended against placing BPC-157 on the 503A bulks list. The committee process is advisory and does not approve a drug.
- Study design
- Regulatory evidence review
The July advisory process did not create FDA approval or automatically authorize compounding.
Read the original sourceRat tendon study · migration and outgrowth
Cell and animal study
Chang CH et al. Journal of Applied Physiology, 2011.
The study reported increased outgrowth, survival, and migration of rat tendon fibroblasts and improved findings in a rat tendon-injury model. It did not test a person or a commercial product.
- Participants / model
- Rat tendon cells and injured rats
- Treatment
- Experimental BPC-157 exposure
- Study design
- Laboratory and animal study
FDA 2026 briefing · evidence and safety review
FDA staff briefing document
US Food and Drug Administration, July 2026.
FDA staff described nomenclature and formulation uncertainty, found the pharmacology largely limited to animal work, found insufficient clinical safety information for proposed routes, and recommended against placing BPC-157 on the 503A bulks list. The committee process is advisory and does not approve a drug.
- Study design
- Regulatory evidence review
The July advisory process did not create FDA approval or automatically authorize compounding.
Read the original sourceDoes BPC-157 treat IBS, IBD, ulcers, or “leaky gut”?
No reliable human efficacy result in the cited evidence supports those gut claims. Positive findings come mainly from animal injury models, while the old oral Phase 1 registry record has no posted results.
A rat fistula, ulcer, or chemically induced inflammation model can test healing biology. It cannot establish symptom improvement in irritable bowel syndrome, remission in inflammatory bowel disease, or repair of a loosely defined “leaky gut” condition.
Did the registered oral study answer the gut question?
No. NCT02637284 was a healthy-volunteer safety and pharmacokinetic study, not an IBS or IBD efficacy trial, and it has no posted results.
ClinicalTrials.gov · four exact intervention records
Registry record set
ClinicalTrials.gov records.
ClinicalTrials.gov listed four records under the exact names and aliases: dormant oral phase 1 record NCT02637284 with no posted results; completed open-label gummy study NCT07752381 with no posted results; not-yet-recruiting Arkansas rotator-cuff study NCT07803250; and Hudson Biotech record NCT07437547. The Hudson record sits in a sponsor batch containing records that call themselves fictional or mock and others that copy unrelated Lilly identifiers, so it is treated as a registry anomaly rather than proof of an operating trial.
- Study design
- Four ClinicalTrials.gov records under exact names and aliases, with sponsor-batch consistency assessment
Registry status is sponsor-reported. A registration is not a result, peer review, approval, or proof that recruitment occurred.
Read the original sourceRat gut injury · fistula model
Animal study
Klicek R et al. Journal of Pharmacological Sciences, 2008.
BPC-157 improved selected healing measures in rats with a surgically created connection between colon and skin. This is a severe experimental injury model, not irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, or “leaky gut” in people.
- Participants / model
- Rats with surgically created colocutaneous fistulas
- Treatment
- Experimental BPC-157 regimens
- Study design
- Controlled animal injury study
ClinicalTrials.gov · four exact intervention records
Registry record set
ClinicalTrials.gov records.
ClinicalTrials.gov listed four records under the exact names and aliases: dormant oral phase 1 record NCT02637284 with no posted results; completed open-label gummy study NCT07752381 with no posted results; not-yet-recruiting Arkansas rotator-cuff study NCT07803250; and Hudson Biotech record NCT07437547. The Hudson record sits in a sponsor batch containing records that call themselves fictional or mock and others that copy unrelated Lilly identifiers, so it is treated as a registry anomaly rather than proof of an operating trial.
- Study design
- Four ClinicalTrials.gov records under exact names and aliases, with sponsor-batch consistency assessment
Registry status is sponsor-reported. A registration is not a result, peer review, approval, or proof that recruitment occurred.
Read the original sourceFDA 2026 briefing · evidence and safety review
FDA staff briefing document
US Food and Drug Administration, July 2026.
FDA staff described nomenclature and formulation uncertainty, found the pharmacology largely limited to animal work, found insufficient clinical safety information for proposed routes, and recommended against placing BPC-157 on the 503A bulks list. The committee process is advisory and does not approve a drug.
- Study design
- Regulatory evidence review
The July advisory process did not create FDA approval or automatically authorize compounding.
Read the original sourceWhat are the known safety limits?
The two-person intravenous pilot and small uncontrolled reports found no clear short-term safety signal. They are too small to establish general safety. Long-term exposure, pregnancy, immune reactions, interactions, and risks from injected or intranasal products remain inadequately characterized.
- Rare or delayed harms: three small uncontrolled reports cannot detect them reliably.
- Route changes: bladder instillation and short IV exposure do not validate chronic subcutaneous, oral, nasal, or transdermal use.
- Product quality: an unapproved vial adds identity, potency, sterility, endotoxin, and degradation uncertainty.
- Angiogenesis claims: preclinical pathway changes do not quantify cancer benefit or risk in exposed people.
Does “no adverse events” mean it is safe?
No. The two-person IV pilot reported no event during its short observation window, but both participants had previously received the compound. Two people cannot characterize uncommon or delayed harms.
IV pilot · two previously exposed adults
Pilot safety report
Lee E, Burgess K. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2025.
A 58-year-old man and 68-year-old woman, both previously exposed to intravenous BPC-157, received 10 mg and then 20 mg on consecutive days. The authors reported no self-reported adverse events or material changes in the measured vital signs and laboratory markers. With two re-exposed participants and no comparator, this cannot establish general or long-term safety.
- Participants / model
- Two adults with prior intravenous BPC-157 exposure
- Treatment
- 10 mg then 20 mg intravenously over one hour on consecutive days
- Follow-up
- Two treatment days with short-term measurements
- Study design
- Uncontrolled safety pilot
The two-person pilot had no efficacy endpoint and could not characterize uncommon or delayed harms.
Read the original sourceIV pilot · two previously exposed adults
Pilot safety report
Lee E, Burgess K. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2025.
A 58-year-old man and 68-year-old woman, both previously exposed to intravenous BPC-157, received 10 mg and then 20 mg on consecutive days. The authors reported no self-reported adverse events or material changes in the measured vital signs and laboratory markers. With two re-exposed participants and no comparator, this cannot establish general or long-term safety.
- Participants / model
- Two adults with prior intravenous BPC-157 exposure
- Treatment
- 10 mg then 20 mg intravenously over one hour on consecutive days
- Follow-up
- Two treatment days with short-term measurements
- Study design
- Uncontrolled safety pilot
The two-person pilot had no efficacy endpoint and could not characterize uncommon or delayed harms.
Read the original sourceFDA safety page · BPC-157 concerns
FDA safety communication
US Food and Drug Administration.
FDA lists BPC-157 among bulk substances that may present significant safety risks in compounding and cites limited safety information plus immunogenicity and impurity concerns.
- Study design
- Agency safety summary
FDA 2026 briefing · evidence and safety review
FDA staff briefing document
US Food and Drug Administration, July 2026.
FDA staff described nomenclature and formulation uncertainty, found the pharmacology largely limited to animal work, found insufficient clinical safety information for proposed routes, and recommended against placing BPC-157 on the 503A bulks list. The committee process is advisory and does not approve a drug.
- Study design
- Regulatory evidence review
The July advisory process did not create FDA approval or automatically authorize compounding.
Read the original sourceIs BPC-157 approved or allowed in sport?
On July 23, 2026, FDA’s advisory committee voted to recommend BPC-157 for the 503A compounding list. That recommendation did not grant FDA drug approval. WADA prohibits BPC-157 for covered athletes.
FDA staff had recommended against inclusion after reviewing the evidence and safety concerns. The advisory committee voted in favor despite that advice.
Did the committee vote to recommend BPC-157 for compounding?
Yes. On July 23, 2026, the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee voted 8–6, with one abstention, to recommend BPC-157 for the 503A bulks list used in pharmacy compounding.
The recommendation is nonbinding. It does not itself add BPC-157 to the list, authorize compounding, or grant FDA drug approval.
Committee vote · 8–6 in favor
Reporting from the committee meeting
Sony Salzman and Mary Kekatos. ABC News, July 23, 2026.
ABC News reported an 8–6 vote, with one abstention, in favor of BPC-157 for the compounding list. The report distinguishes the advisory recommendation from FDA’s final decision.
- Study design
- Committee vote coverage
FDA · what the recommendation means
Official FDA meeting information
US Food and Drug Administration. Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee, July 23–24, 2026.
The FDA meeting page identifies BPC-157 free base and acetate as substances considered for the 503A bulks list. It explains that advisory committee recommendations are nonbinding.
- Study design
- Advisory committee remit and agenda
FDA 2026 briefing · evidence and safety review
FDA staff briefing document
US Food and Drug Administration, July 2026.
FDA staff described nomenclature and formulation uncertainty, found the pharmacology largely limited to animal work, found insufficient clinical safety information for proposed routes, and recommended against placing BPC-157 on the 503A bulks list. The committee process is advisory and does not approve a drug.
- Study design
- Regulatory evidence review
The July advisory process did not create FDA approval or automatically authorize compounding.
Read the original sourceFDA safety page · BPC-157 concerns
FDA safety communication
US Food and Drug Administration.
FDA lists BPC-157 among bulk substances that may present significant safety risks in compounding and cites limited safety information plus immunogenicity and impurity concerns.
- Study design
- Agency safety summary
WADA 2026 · BPC-157 under S0
Sports rule
World Anti-Doping Agency, effective 1 January 2026.
BPC-157 is prohibited under S0 as a non-approved substance. The rule applies to athletes governed by the World Anti-Doping Code.
- Study design
- Binding sport rule for covered athletes
Studies and sources
Knee series · BPC alone and BPC plus TB4
Retrospective case series
Lee E, Padgett B. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2021.
Sixteen of 17 treated patients were reached by telephone. Twelve had received BPC-157 alone and four had received BPC-157 plus TB4. Eleven of 12 in the BPC-only group and three of four in the combination group reported significant pain improvement. The review used no control group, validated outcome instrument, imaging confirmation, or fixed follow-up schedule.
- Participants / model
- 17 people treated for varied knee-pain diagnoses; 16 reached for follow-up
- Treatment
- Intra-articular BPC-157, alone or with a separate TB4 injection
- Follow-up
- Chart review covering one year; follow-up timing varied
- Study design
- Single-clinic retrospective telephone follow-up
Pain reports cannot establish structural repair, comparative benefit, or the contribution of TB4.
Read the original sourceBladder pilot · uncontrolled human report
Uncontrolled pilot study
Lee E, Walker C, Ayadi B. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2024.
Twelve women with interstitial cystitis received one bladder instillation during cystoscopy. The paper reports large self-reported symptom improvements and no adverse events, but it had no comparator, blinded assessment, or replication.
- Participants / model
- 12 women with moderate-to-severe interstitial cystitis that had not responded to pentosan polysulfate
- Treatment
- One 10 mg intravesical administration during cystoscopy
- Follow-up
- Single administration with follow-up reported by the authors
- Study design
- Single-site uncontrolled pilot
This route and condition do not establish oral or subcutaneous effects.
Read the original sourceIV pilot · two previously exposed adults
Pilot safety report
Lee E, Burgess K. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 2025.
A 58-year-old man and 68-year-old woman, both previously exposed to intravenous BPC-157, received 10 mg and then 20 mg on consecutive days. The authors reported no self-reported adverse events or material changes in the measured vital signs and laboratory markers. With two re-exposed participants and no comparator, this cannot establish general or long-term safety.
- Participants / model
- Two adults with prior intravenous BPC-157 exposure
- Treatment
- 10 mg then 20 mg intravenously over one hour on consecutive days
- Follow-up
- Two treatment days with short-term measurements
- Study design
- Uncontrolled safety pilot
The two-person pilot had no efficacy endpoint and could not characterize uncommon or delayed harms.
Read the original sourceClinicalTrials.gov · four exact intervention records
Registry record set
ClinicalTrials.gov records.
ClinicalTrials.gov listed four records under the exact names and aliases: dormant oral phase 1 record NCT02637284 with no posted results; completed open-label gummy study NCT07752381 with no posted results; not-yet-recruiting Arkansas rotator-cuff study NCT07803250; and Hudson Biotech record NCT07437547. The Hudson record sits in a sponsor batch containing records that call themselves fictional or mock and others that copy unrelated Lilly identifiers, so it is treated as a registry anomaly rather than proof of an operating trial.
- Study design
- Four ClinicalTrials.gov records under exact names and aliases, with sponsor-batch consistency assessment
Registry status is sponsor-reported. A registration is not a result, peer review, approval, or proof that recruitment occurred.
Read the original sourceFDA 2026 briefing · evidence and safety review
FDA staff briefing document
US Food and Drug Administration, July 2026.
FDA staff described nomenclature and formulation uncertainty, found the pharmacology largely limited to animal work, found insufficient clinical safety information for proposed routes, and recommended against placing BPC-157 on the 503A bulks list. The committee process is advisory and does not approve a drug.
- Study design
- Regulatory evidence review
The July advisory process did not create FDA approval or automatically authorize compounding.
Read the original sourceFDA safety page · BPC-157 concerns
FDA safety communication
US Food and Drug Administration.
FDA lists BPC-157 among bulk substances that may present significant safety risks in compounding and cites limited safety information plus immunogenicity and impurity concerns.
- Study design
- Agency safety summary
Rat tendon study · migration and outgrowth
Cell and animal study
Chang CH et al. Journal of Applied Physiology, 2011.
The study reported increased outgrowth, survival, and migration of rat tendon fibroblasts and improved findings in a rat tendon-injury model. It did not test a person or a commercial product.
- Participants / model
- Rat tendon cells and injured rats
- Treatment
- Experimental BPC-157 exposure
- Study design
- Laboratory and animal study
Rat gut injury · fistula model
Animal study
Klicek R et al. Journal of Pharmacological Sciences, 2008.
BPC-157 improved selected healing measures in rats with a surgically created connection between colon and skin. This is a severe experimental injury model, not irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, or “leaky gut” in people.
- Participants / model
- Rats with surgically created colocutaneous fistulas
- Treatment
- Experimental BPC-157 regimens
- Study design
- Controlled animal injury study
WADA 2026 · BPC-157 under S0
Sports rule
World Anti-Doping Agency, effective 1 January 2026.
BPC-157 is prohibited under S0 as a non-approved substance. The rule applies to athletes governed by the World Anti-Doping Code.
- Study design
- Binding sport rule for covered athletes
Committee vote · 8–6 in favor
Reporting from the committee meeting
Sony Salzman and Mary Kekatos. ABC News, July 23, 2026.
ABC News reported an 8–6 vote, with one abstention, in favor of BPC-157 for the compounding list. The report distinguishes the advisory recommendation from FDA’s final decision.
- Study design
- Committee vote coverage
FDA · what the recommendation means
Official FDA meeting information
US Food and Drug Administration. Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee, July 23–24, 2026.
The FDA meeting page identifies BPC-157 free base and acetate as substances considered for the 503A bulks list. It explains that advisory committee recommendations are nonbinding.
- Study design
- Advisory committee remit and agenda
Why is BPC-157 in A tier?
The A grade reflects extensive animal injury-repair research. Human evidence is limited to small uncontrolled reports and a two-person safety pilot; clinical efficacy, FDA approval, product quality, and long-term safety remain unestablished.