Peptide claims can look equally confident while resting on very different evidence. The atlas uses A through E for progressively different claim-support boundaries and keeps X on a separate contradictory lane. A grade belongs to an exact claim, not to a molecule as a whole.
The definitions come from Evidence grading. Use them with the field-by-field clinical-trial reading guide, not as a shortcut around the cited study rows.
| Grade | Evidence boundary | Existing worked example | Status caveat |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | Current approval plus adequate controlled trials and post-market context for the specific labeled use | Semaglutide labeled claims | Bound to the named product, use, population, jurisdiction, and current label |
| B | Multiple controlled studies or a strong pivotal study, but no current approval for the claim or a material confirmation gap | Retatrutide development-stage claims | Strong human evidence is not marketing authorization |
| C | Small, uncontrolled, surrogate-endpoint, or early-phase human evidence | BPC-157 preliminary human rows | Human observation is not established efficacy |
| D | In vitro or animal evidence without adequate human efficacy evidence | BPC-157 preclinical rows | Mechanistic plausibility does not establish patient benefit |
| E | Testimonials, extrapolation, or marketing claims without adequate scientific support | Generic unsupported claim | Missing support is not affirmative disproof |
| X | Adequate negative evidence, a failed program, or a claim inconsistent with the studied material | No current catalog row | X is separate from the A-E support ladder |
- AGrade A: Établi pour une utilisation indiquée spécifique
- BGrade B: Preuve humaine modérée
- CGrade C: Preuve humaine préliminaire
- DGrade D: Préclinique uniquement
- EGrade E: Affirmation anecdotique/commerciale
- XGrade X: Les preuves contredisent ou ne soutiennent pas l'affirmation
- A: current labeled claim; example: semaglutide labeled claims.
- B: moderate human evidence; example: retatrutide development claims.
- C: preliminary human evidence; example: BPC-157 human rows.
- D: preclinical only; example: BPC-157 preclinical rows.
- E: unsupported anecdote / marketing; example: generic unsupported claim.
- X: adequate negative or contradictory evidence; no current catalog example.
Grade A — established for a specific labeled use
Definition. A requires current authorization plus adequate controlled trials and post-market context for the exact labeled use.
Example. The semaglutide monograph assigns A to labeled glycemic-control, weight-management, and cardiovascular-risk claims supported by their corresponding programs and current status rows.
Do not infer. A is not a blanket endorsement, a statement that risk is absent, or evidence for a different product, population, use, or jurisdiction.
Grade B — moderate human evidence
Definition. B records multiple controlled studies or a strong pivotal study when the exact claim lacks current approval or retains an important confirmation gap.
Example. The retatrutide monograph, verified in August 2026, assigns B to its development-stage Phase 3 claims while its status table records no identified marketing authorization.
Do not infer. Late-stage evidence and authorization are different facts. B does not mean ineffective, and a large study does not erase claim or status boundaries.
Grade C — preliminary human evidence
Definition. C covers small, uncontrolled, surrogate-endpoint, or early-phase human evidence.
Example. The BPC-157 monograph assigns C to a small A study without a separate comparison group. Source de la définition: Neutral gloss; usage context: Evidence grading methodology · Glossaire interstitial-cystitis pilot and to a very small early human safety and How a substance is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body; atlas pages report pharmacokinetic data such as half-life, metabolism, and clearance. Source de la définition: Neutral gloss; usage context: Routes, devices, and absorption primer · Glossaire report.
Do not infer. The existence of human observations does not make the result controlled, generalizable, or sufficient for an established-efficacy claim.
Grade D — preclinical only
Definition. D is used when the directly relevant support is in vitro or animal evidence and adequate human efficacy evidence is absent.
Example. BPC-157’s inflammatory-bowel-disease and wound-healing rows are D because the cited support is Evidence from in vitro or animal studies with no adequate human efficacy evidence — the atlas Grade D lane. Source de la définition: Evidence grading methodology · Glossaire. Its musculoskeletal row also remains below established human evidence in the current monograph.
Do not infer. A plausible mechanism, animal result, or uncontrolled record cannot be silently translated into patient benefit.
Grade E — anecdotal or marketing claim
Definition. E covers testimonials, extrapolation, or marketing assertions without adequate scientific support.
Example. Where a claim circulates but no structured evidence directly supports it, the atlas can use E without pretending the claim was tested.
Do not infer. E means the available support cannot justify a stronger conclusion; it does not itself prove the opposite conclusion.
Grade X — evidence contradicts the claim
Definition. X records an affirmative conflict: adequate negative evidence, a failed program, or evidence inconsistent with the named claim or material.
Example. The current catalog has no X row, so the worked ladder uses the generic contradictory-evidence boundary rather than inventing a peptide example.
Do not infer. X is not “worse than E.” E describes inadequate support; X describes relevant evidence pointing against the claim.
Study-level fields
A reader should audit six groups of facts behind a grade: design; population and comparator; exact material and exposure; endpoint and result; limitations and bias checks; and stable study or registry identifiers. These fields preserve what was actually studied and what the result can support.
Statistical significance is not automatically clinical importance, and biomarker movement is not silently converted into patient benefit. The study row supports a claim-level synthesis; it does not replace it.
Evidence and status remain separate
A grade answers how well evidence supports an exact claim. A status table answers whether a product is authorized, A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance. Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation. Source de la définition: Scope and selection methodology · Glossaire, prohibited in sport, or otherwise classified in a named jurisdiction and at a stated date.
That separation explains why retatrutide can have B claims without identified marketing authorization and why BPC-157 can have C and D claims while its status rows separately record no FDA-approved or EMA-authorized product and a The World Anti-Doping Agency; its Prohibited List classifies many peptides as prohibited substances in sport. Source de la définition: WADA and sport regulation brief · Glossaire classification. Audit the grade in the evidence-by-claim row, then follow the key-study and source records before drawing a bounded conclusion.