Peptide Medix product catalog

ET
Editorial Team
August 16, 2026 9 min read

Peptides for muscle growth is, in research terms, a question about three separable biological levers: pulsatile growth hormone release, local IGF-1 signalling in skeletal muscle, and inhibition of the myostatin/activin brake. Almost every compound sold into this space maps onto one of those three, and choosing between them is a question of which lever a given experiment is trying to move — not of which molecule is "strongest". This overview sets out the classes, the published evidence base behind each, and the selection logic researchers use when they specify a reference material. Every product referenced is supplied for laboratory research use only and is not for human or veterinary use.

What "muscle growth" means as a research endpoint

Preclinical work on skeletal muscle rarely measures "muscle growth" as a single number. Published studies typically report one or more of: myofibre cross-sectional area on histology, wet muscle mass normalised to body mass, satellite-cell activation markers (Pax7, MyoD, myogenin), protein-synthesis rate by stable-isotope or SUnSET labelling, and mTORC1 pathway phosphorylation (p70S6K, 4E-BP1). Human data, where it exists, is usually lean body mass by DXA plus circulating IGF-1.

That distinction matters because compounds behave very differently across those endpoints. A growth hormone secretagogue may raise serum IGF-1 substantially in rodents while producing modest changes in fibre area; an IGF-1 analog applied locally may change fibre area in the injected muscle with little systemic signal. Selecting a reference standard without first fixing the endpoint is the most common design error in this literature.

The peptide classes studied for skeletal muscle

GHRH analogs

Growth hormone-releasing hormone analogs bind the GHRH receptor on pituitary somatotrophs and increase endogenous GH secretion while preserving its pulsatile pattern. Sermorelin is the GHRH(1-29) fragment — the shortest sequence retaining full activity. Tesamorelin adds a trans-3-hexenoyl group at the N-terminus, which resists dipeptidyl peptidase-4 cleavage and extends plasma survival; it is the one molecule in this family with substantial published human trial data, from HIV-associated lipodystrophy programmes where visceral adipose tissue, not muscle mass, was the primary endpoint. CJC-1295 without DAC (also catalogued as Mod GRF 1-29) carries four amino-acid substitutions that block enzymatic degradation without adding the albumin-binding maleimide of the DAC version.

Ghrelin-receptor agonists (GHRPs)

GHRPs act at GHS-R1a, a distinct receptor from the GHRH receptor, and suppress somatostatin tone as well as directly stimulating GH release. Because the two receptors are independent, GHRH analogs and GHRPs produce a greater-than-additive GH response in animal models — the published rationale behind paired preparations such as CJC-1295 with ipamorelin. Ipamorelin is the most selective member of the family, reported in the original Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry work as producing GH release without the cortisol and prolactin elevation seen with earlier analogs. GHRP-2 and GHRP-6 are more potent GH releasers in rodent assays but less selective; GHRP-6 in particular is a strong ghrelin-receptor agonist and is frequently used in appetite-signalling research rather than muscle work.

IGF-1 analogs and splice variants

Where the secretagogues act upstream, IGF peptides act at the tissue itself. IGF-1 LR3 is a long-arginine-3 analog with a 13-residue N-terminal extension and an Arg substitution at position 3; both modifications reduce binding to IGF binding proteins, which is why it shows extended activity in cell culture compared with native IGF-1. IGF-1 DES(1-3) is the truncated variant lacking the first three residues, with similarly reduced IGFBP affinity. MGF — mechano growth factor, the IGF-1Ec splice variant — is transcribed in muscle after mechanical loading and has been studied for satellite-cell proliferation rather than differentiation. Its PEGylated form was developed to address MGF's very short in-vitro stability. These are among the more technically demanding reagents in the growth hormone and performance category: they are supplied in sub-milligram quantities and are sensitive to handling.

Myostatin-pathway inhibitors

Myostatin (GDF-8) is a TGF-β superfamily member that restrains muscle mass; naturally occurring loss-of-function variants in cattle, dogs and one documented human case produce marked hypertrophy. Follistatin-344 is a glycosylated splice isoform that binds and neutralises myostatin and activin A. ACE-031 is a soluble activin receptor type IIB fusion decoy whose clinical development was discontinued after vascular findings in trial participants — a fact worth recording in any protocol that cites it. Both are protein-scale reagents (follistatin-344 is roughly 37,800 Da) rather than short synthetic peptides, and they behave accordingly in solution.

What the published record actually reports

Cell and tissue work

The clearest signal in this literature comes from culture. IGF-1 and its IGFBP-resistant analogs reliably increase myotube diameter and protein synthesis in C2C12 and primary human myoblast systems, with concentration-response curves that reproduce across laboratories. MGF has been reported to increase myoblast proliferation while delaying differentiation — the opposite of mature IGF-1's effect in the same cells — which is the basis for the split-role model of the IGF-1 gene's splice products. Follistatin added to myoblast culture neutralises exogenous myostatin and restores differentiation, confirming target engagement rather than hypertrophy as such.

Rodent studies

Animal work is where the secretagogues are best characterised. GHRH analogs and GHRPs raise circulating GH and, downstream, hepatic IGF-1 in rats and mice; the magnitude depends heavily on age, sex and feeding state, and young animals with intact somatotroph reserve respond far more than aged ones. Reported effects on muscle mass itself are more modest than the hormonal signal implies. Myostatin-pathway work in rodents is the most striking: genetic and antibody-mediated blockade produce large increases in muscle mass, but published characterisation of tendon and connective-tissue quality in those animals is a recurring caveat.

Human data

Human evidence is confined to approved pharmaceutical products. Tesamorelin trials in HIV-associated lipodystrophy measured visceral adipose tissue as the primary endpoint with lean mass secondary. Recombinant somatropin has decades of trial data in deficiency states. Trials of activin receptor decoys in muscular dystrophy were halted for safety reasons. No published randomised trial supports research-grade GHRPs, IGF analogs or follistatin preparations as interventions in healthy adults, and none is approved for that use.

Comparison table: peptides most often specified in muscle research

CompoundClass / targetReported half-lifePrimary research useResearch sizes
SermorelinGHRH(1-29), GHRH receptor~10-20 minPituitary GH-axis assays; short-pulse models2 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg
TesamorelinStabilised GHRH analog~26-38 minAdipose and GH-axis work; human trial comparator5 mg, 10 mg, 20 mg
CJC-1295 (No DAC)Tetra-substituted GHRH analog~30 minPulsatile GH stimulation without carrier binding2 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg
IpamorelinPentapeptide GHS-R1a agonist~2 hSelective GH release with minimal ACTH/prolactin cross-talk2 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg
GHRP-2Hexapeptide GHS-R1a agonist~30-60 minHigh-amplitude GH release; ghrelin-axis studies5 mg, 10 mg
CJC-1295 + IpamorelinDual-receptor preparationMixedSynergy models across both GH-release pathways4 mg, 10 mg, 20 mg
IGF-1 LR3IGFBP-resistant IGF-1 analog~20-30 h reportedCell-culture growth supplement; local hypertrophy models0.1 mg, 1 mg
MGFIGF-1Ec splice variantMinutes (native)Satellite-cell proliferation assays2 mg, 5 mg
Follistatin-344Myostatin/activin binding proteinProtein-scale, variableMyostatin-pathway inhibition studies1 mg

Half-life figures above are drawn from published pharmacokinetic reports on the reference molecules and vary with species and assay; regard them as ordering information for experimental design, not as specifications of the supplied material.

How researchers choose peptides for muscle growth research

Four questions usually settle the selection.

  1. Is the model intact? Secretagogues require a functioning pituitary. In hypophysectomised animals or isolated myotube culture they have no substrate to act on, and an IGF or myostatin-pathway reagent is the only coherent choice.
  2. Systemic or local? GHRH analogs and GHRPs raise a systemic signal. MGF and the IGF analogs are used where the question concerns a specific muscle or a specific cell population.
  3. Does receptor selectivity matter? If the readout could be confounded by cortisol, prolactin or appetite signalling, the selectivity difference between ipamorelin and the GHRP-2/GHRP-6 pair is the deciding factor.
  4. What comparator does the field expect? Reviewers of GH-axis work generally expect recombinant somatropin as a positive control. That is a prescription biologic, listed for reference only, and is not interchangeable with research-grade secretagogue material.

The full set of compounds tagged to this research goal, including blends and multi-vial preparations, is catalogued under peptides for muscle growth.

Formats and what they change

Most compounds in this area ship as lyophilised powder in sealed vials, reconstituted in the laboratory before use. Blended vials — a GHRH analog and a GHRP co-lyophilised in one container — reduce handling steps but fix the ratio between the two molecules, which is a limitation in any concentration-response work; separate vials are the better choice whenever the ratio is itself a variable. Oral formats exist for a small number of compounds in this category, notably the non-peptide secretagogue ibutamoren, whose oral bioavailability comes from its non-peptide structure rather than any formulation advantage.

Purity, identity and handling

Short synthetic peptides such as ipamorelin and the GHRPs are routinely supplied at 98-99% by HPLC and are straightforward to characterise. The larger recombinant-scale reagents — IGF-1 LR3, follistatin-344 — are harder, and a purity figure alone tells you little: for these, mass-spectrometric identity confirmation and an endotoxin figure matter more than the last percentage point of HPLC area. Any lot used in publishable work should arrive with a certificate of analysis carrying the lot number, method, and retention data; our guide to reading a peptide COA covers what each section should contain and which omissions are red flags.

Lyophilised vials in this class are stable at -20 °C in the dark for extended periods. Once in solution, the IGF-family reagents are the least forgiving: reconstitute in small working volumes, aliquot immediately, and avoid repeated freezing and thawing, which degrades activity faster than storage time alone.

Common errors in study design

Three recur often enough to be worth naming. The first is reading a serum IGF-1 rise as evidence of muscle hypertrophy; they are correlated but not equivalent, and papers that report only the hormone have not measured the endpoint they claim. The second is using a secretagogue in a preparation with no functioning pituitary — an isolated muscle, a myotube culture, a hypophysectomised model — where the compound has no mechanism available to it. The third is comparing a co-lyophilised blend against a single molecule and attributing the difference to synergy, when the blend also differs in total peptide mass. Matching total mass, or running each component separately alongside the combination, is what makes a synergy claim defensible.

A fourth, quieter problem is material provenance. Reagents in this category vary widely between suppliers, and the larger recombinant proteins vary most. Recording the lot number, the supplier and the analytical figures in the methods section is the minimum needed for another laboratory to reproduce the work.

Regulatory status

None of the peptides described here is approved for human use as a muscle-mass intervention in the United States. Tesamorelin holds an approval for a specific lipodystrophy indication in its pharmaceutical form; recombinant somatropin and insulin are prescription biologics; ACE-031 and follistatin-344 have no approval anywhere. SARMs and PPAR/REV-ERB compounds sometimes catalogued alongside these peptides are unapproved investigational agents and are prohibited in competitive sport. All material supplied here is research-grade, sold for in-vitro and laboratory research only, and must not be administered to humans or animals.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which peptides are most studied for skeletal muscle research?
Published work clusters around three families: GHRH analogs (sermorelin, tesamorelin, CJC-1295), ghrelin-receptor agonists (ipamorelin, GHRP-2, GHRP-6, hexarelin), and IGF-family reagents (IGF-1 LR3, IGF-1 DES, MGF). Myostatin-pathway inhibitors such as follistatin-344 form a smaller fourth group. Volume of literature is heaviest on the secretagogues and thinnest on the myostatin decoys.
What is the difference between a GHRH analog and a GHRP?
They act on different receptors. GHRH analogs bind the GHRH receptor on pituitary somatotrophs; GHRPs bind GHS-R1a, the ghrelin receptor, and additionally reduce somatostatin inhibition. Because the pathways are independent, animal studies report a synergistic growth hormone response when both are present, which is why paired preparations exist as research reagents.
Why is IGF-1 LR3 used in cell culture instead of native IGF-1?
The LR3 modifications — a 13-residue N-terminal extension and an arginine substitution at position 3 — sharply reduce binding to IGF binding proteins present in serum-containing media. Native IGF-1 is largely sequestered by those proteins; the analog remains available to the receptor, giving a more reproducible signal at lower concentrations.
Is there human trial evidence for these compounds increasing lean mass?
Human trial data exists for the approved pharmaceutical forms of tesamorelin and recombinant somatropin, where lean body mass was measured as a secondary endpoint in specific patient populations. There is no comparable trial evidence for research-grade GHRPs, IGF analogs or myostatin inhibitors in healthy people, and none of them is approved for that purpose.
Do blended vials or separate vials make more sense for a study?
Separate vials whenever the ratio between two molecules is a variable you want to control or vary, since a co-lyophilised blend fixes that ratio permanently. Blends reduce reconstitution and handling steps, so they suit fixed-ratio comparisons and screening work where the combination itself is the treatment being tested.
What should a certificate of analysis show for these reagents?
Lot number, HPLC purity with the chromatogram and method conditions, mass-spectrometric identity with the observed versus theoretical mass, water content, and counter-ion identity. For the larger recombinant reagents, an endotoxin figure is more informative than purity alone. A COA with no lot number or no visible chromatogram should be regarded as unverified.
How should these peptides be stored in a laboratory?
Lyophilised powder is stored sealed at -20 °C, protected from light and moisture, and allowed to reach room temperature before opening to avoid condensation. Reconstituted solutions are refrigerated and used within a short window; IGF-family reagents in particular lose activity with repeated freeze-thaw, so aliquoting at the point of reconstitution is standard practice.

Ready to shop?

Explore the Peptide Catalog

Find related store products, research reagents, formats, and laboratory supplies.

Browse Products