CJC-1295 vs IGF-1 LR3.

Two research / preclinical compounds in growth hormone, compared on the published evidence.

CJC-1295Research / preclinical
CategoryGrowth hormone
StatusResearch / preclinical
Sources3 cited
IGF-1 LR3Research / preclinical
CategoryGrowth hormone
StatusResearch / preclinical
Sources4 cited
01

What it is

CJC-1295

CJC-1295 is a synthetic analog of growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH), based on the first 29 amino acids of human GHRH (GRF 1-29) with several amino-acid substitutions that resist enzymatic degradation. The name is used for two distinct molecules: "CJC-1295 with DAC," which carries a Drug Affinity Complex (a maleimidoproprionic acid linker) that covalently binds to circulating albumin to dramatically prolong its action; and "CJC-1295 without DAC" (often sold as "modified GRF 1-29" or "Mod GRF 1-29"), which lacks the albumin-binding linker. It was originally developed by the Canadian biotech company ConjuChem as an investigational therapeutic.

IGF-1 LR3

IGF-1 LR3 (Long R3 IGF-1) is a synthetic, recombinant analog of human insulin-like growth factor-1. It is an 83-amino-acid polypeptide built from the 70-residue native IGF-1 sequence with two structural changes: a glutamate-to-arginine substitution at position 3 and a 13-residue N-terminal extension peptide. It is produced and sold primarily as a research reagent and as a cell-culture supplement (marketed under names such as LONG R3 IGF-I), not as a licensed human medicine.

02

How it works

CJC-1295

As a GHRH analog, CJC-1295 binds the GHRH receptor on somatotroph cells of the anterior pituitary, activating Gs-protein/cAMP/PKA signaling to stimulate synthesis and pulsatile release of endogenous growth hormone (GH), which in turn raises hepatic insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). The four substitutions in the GRF(1-29) backbone (notably at the position-2 alanine that is the dipeptidyl peptidase-IV cleavage site) protect the peptide from rapid breakdown, extending the half-life of the non-DAC form to roughly 30 minutes versus minutes for native GHRH. In the DAC version, the maleimide linker forms a covalent bond with cysteine-34 of serum albumin, creating a long-circulating depot; because it raises GH in a more sustained rather than sharply pulsatile manner, it is described as increasing trough and mean GH while largely preserving the body's own pulse pattern.

IGF-1 LR3

Like native IGF-1, LR3 binds and activates the IGF-1 receptor (IGF-1R), a receptor tyrosine kinase that signals through the PI3K/Akt/mTOR and Ras/MAPK pathways to drive protein synthesis, cell proliferation, and survival. Its distinguishing feature is engineered: the position-3 arginine substitution plus the N-terminal extension dramatically lower its affinity for the six IGF-binding proteins (IGFBPs) that normally sequester circulating IGF-1. Because little of the analog is bound and held by IGFBPs, a much larger fraction remains free to engage IGF-1R, and in animal models its circulating half-life is substantially longer than that of native IGF-1. This same "escape from IGFBP regulation" is why it is favored in mammalian cell culture, where it resists sequestration by cell-secreted binding proteins.

03

The evidence

CJC-1295

The principal human evidence is a single 2006 Phase 1 study in healthy adults by Teichman et al. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab, PMID 16352683), which reported that one subcutaneous dose of CJC-1295 with DAC produced dose-dependent increases in mean plasma GH of roughly 2- to 10-fold for 6 days or more and IGF-1 increases of about 1.5- to 3-fold for 9-11 days, with an estimated half-life of 5.8-8.1 days and IGF-1 staying above baseline up to 28 days after repeated dosing. ConjuChem advanced the DAC compound into a Phase 2 trial in HIV-associated visceral obesity (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00267527), but that 12-week trial was terminated in 2006. Beyond these, robust controlled human efficacy and long-term safety data are essentially absent; there are no large or long-term trials, no published outcomes for the non-DAC "modified GRF 1-29" form in humans, and much of the mechanistic rationale rests on GHRH-class pharmacology rather than direct trials of this molecule. Claims about body composition, recovery, or anti-aging benefit are not supported by published controlled human outcome data.

IGF-1 LR3

Direct evidence for LR3 is overwhelmingly preclinical and in-vitro, not clinical. In a guinea pig study (Conlon et al., J Endocrinol 1995, PMID 7561636), Long R3 IGF-I infusion stimulated organ growth while paradoxically lowering plasma IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP concentrations, illustrating its altered binding-protein behavior in vivo. A mouse study (J Endocrinol 2008, PMID 18577570) reported that long-R3-IGF-I altered mammary signaling and gene expression during prolonged lactation. Analytical work (J Chromatogr B 2003, PMID 12880859) characterized the molecule for bioanalytical detection. There are no controlled human trials demonstrating safety or performance/physique benefits for IGF-1 LR3 specifically; clinical inferences are extrapolated from native IGF-1 (mecasermin) and from receptor pharmacology, which is a meaningful gap because LR3's reduced IGFBP binding changes its tissue exposure relative to the natural hormone.

04

Safety profile

CJC-1295

In the short Phase 1 work, CJC-1295 with DAC was described as generally well tolerated, with the kinds of effects expected from GHRH-class agents (e.g., injection-site reactions, flushing, headache); however, this reflects small numbers and short follow-up. The Phase 2 HIV trial (NCT00267527) was terminated in 2006, and a participant death during the program drew scrutiny, though available reporting attributed that death to pre-existing coronary disease rather than establishing causation by the drug; the episode underscores how thin the safety record is. Sustained elevation of GH/IGF-1 carries class-level theoretical concerns familiar from growth-hormone pharmacology, including fluid retention, joint/muscle pain, insulin resistance and elevated blood glucose, and a theoretical concern about promoting growth of existing malignancy; long-term safety in humans is simply unknown. Much material sold as "CJC-1295" online is from unregulated sources with no purity, sterility, or identity guarantees, adding contamination and mislabeling risks.

IGF-1 LR3

No human safety dataset exists for IGF-1 LR3 itself; the closest human reference is the FDA-approved native IGF-1 drug mecasermin (Increlex), whose label documents hypoglycemia (including severe, seizure-associated events from its insulin-like action), intracranial hypertension with papilledema, and lymphoid (tonsillar/adenoidal) tissue hypertrophy. Because IGF-1R signaling is mitogenic and anti-apoptotic, a theoretical concern across IGF-1 agonists is the promotion of growth in existing neoplastic tissue, though this has not been quantified for LR3 in humans. LR3's much longer free-ligand exposure could plausibly amplify these effects relative to native IGF-1, but this is unverified. Research-grade material also carries purity, sterility, and mislabeling risks that are not controlled to pharmaceutical standards.

05

Regulatory status

CJC-1295

CJC-1295 (with or without DAC) has never been approved by the FDA or any major regulatory agency for any indication and remains an investigational compound that did not complete clinical development. It is not an approved medicine; it is sold only as a "research chemical," and GHRH analogs/GH secretagogues of this type are prohibited in sport by the World Anti-Doping Agency.

IGF-1 LR3

IGF-1 LR3 is not approved by the FDA or any major regulator for human use; it is sold for laboratory research and cell-culture manufacturing only. The only FDA-approved IGF-1 product is mecasermin (Increlex), recombinant native IGF-1 indicated for severe primary IGF-1 deficiency, which is a different molecule. IGF-1 and its analogues are prohibited in sport at all times under WADA Prohibited List section S2.

The honest bottom line

Both CJC-1295 and IGF-1 LR3 are research-use-only compounds without FDA approval; most of what's claimed for either rests on preclinical or early data, and there are essentially no controlled human trials putting the two head to head. The honest comparison is between two large unknowns, not a clear winner.

Running either with your provider?

PepCue logs your doses, runs the vial math, and keeps a provider-ready record for whichever one you're on.

Compounds