As of 2026-08-08, the atlas targets 100 high-recognition entries across four non-equivalent source classes: regulator-approved peptide active substances, clinical-stage A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance. Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 peptides, An entry with substantial scientific visibility or identity value. Biological rationale and non-human evidence do not establish patient benefit. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 or laboratory peptides with substantial scientific visibility, and products frequently marketed in the "research peptide" ecosystem.
Inclusion reflects scientific, clinical, regulatory, or public visibility—not an endorsement. Some marketed names refer to fragments, salts, metal complexes, mixtures, pegylated proteins, or poorly standardized products. The catalog classifies these boundary cases explicitly instead of assuming that every item sold as a peptide is a single well-defined peptide.
Clinical or regulatory importance, scientific visibility, public or research-market visibility, and identity-boundary value enter scope and source-sufficiency review. The result is inclusion with an entry type or deferral or exclusion with a reason. Guardrails are: visibility is not endorsement, identity must be bounded, and claims remain grade-specific.
What is in scope
| Entry type | Inclusion basis | Evidence search emphasis | Required caveat |
|---|---|---|---|
| Approved drug | A regulator-approved peptide active substance with clinical or regulatory importance | Current official product information, regulatory actions, pivotal studies, and post-market context | Approval remains specific to the named product, indication, population, route, jurisdiction, and date |
| A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance. Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 | A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance | Trial registries, early- and later-phase human studies, safety records, and regulatory decisions | Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation |
| An entry with substantial scientific visibility or identity value. Biological rationale and non-human evidence do not establish patient benefit. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 or laboratory peptide | Substantial scientific visibility or identity value | Mechanistic and Evidence from in vitro or animal studies with no adequate human efficacy evidence — the atlas Grade D lane. 定义来源: Evidence grading methodology · 术语表 sources, with human evidence identified separately when it exists | Biological rationale and non-human evidence do not establish patient benefit |
| An entry with frequent visibility in the research-peptide ecosystem. Visibility is not endorsement, and marketed material is not assumed safe, sterile, authentic, or suitable for humans. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 entry | Frequent visibility in the research-peptide ecosystem | Identity resolution and verification of the evidence behind marketed claims | Visibility is not endorsement, and marketed material is not assumed safe, sterile, authentic, or suitable for humans |
| Boundary case | A fragment, salt, complex, mixture, pegylated protein, or poorly standardized name that clarifies an identity boundary | Sources that can bound composition and distinguish the studied entity from the market name | Ambiguity remains explicit; no unique identity, structure, or evidence transfer is invented |
The entry-type separation is an editorial safeguard, not a hierarchy of value. See How Peptide Identity and Structure Assets Are Verified for the identity boundary and the evidence-grading method for claim-specific grades.
What inclusion means
Inclusion means that an entry has enough clinical, regulatory, scientific, public, or identity-boundary relevance for a source-traceable review. It also means that the atlas assigns an entry type and records important uncertainty.
What inclusion does not mean
Inclusion does not endorse efficacy, safety, quality, legality, or human use. It does not make entry types equivalent, authenticate a marketed sample, or assign one evidence grade to every claim about an entry.
The essays Building a 100-Peptide Evidence Atlas and Research Market vs Approved Peptides provide additional context for these boundaries.
Evidence-search target
Each page is a structured narrative review of key evidence, not a claim to have captured every publication ever produced. Search dates, databases, query terms, and selection decisions must be recorded. The search emphasis changes with the entry type and exact claim, while priority is given to:
current official product information and regulatory actions;
pivotal and confirmatory controlled human studies;
systematic reviews and meta-analyses that identify the evidence base;
representative early-phase human pharmacology;
decisive negative, terminated, retracted, or safety studies;
Evidence from in vitro or animal studies with no adequate human efficacy evidence — the atlas Grade D lane. 定义来源: Evidence grading methodology · 术语表 work only when human evidence is absent or the mechanism requires it, clearly labeled as non-human.
Approved-product questions start with the current label and regulatory record; A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance. Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 questions start with trial and development records; An entry with substantial scientific visibility or identity value. Biological rationale and non-human evidence do not establish patient benefit. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 or laboratory entries often require mechanistic sources; and An entry with frequent visibility in the research-peptide ecosystem. Visibility is not endorsement, and marketed material is not assumed safe, sterile, authentic, or suitable for humans. 定义来源: Scope and selection methodology · 术语表 claims require verification without treating marketing as efficacy, safety, purity, or identity evidence.
Refresh policy
Approval, trial, The World Anti-Doping Agency; its Prohibited List classifies many peptides as prohibited substances in sport. 定义来源: WADA and sport regulation brief · 术语表, and legal-status claims are time-sensitive. Each carries
an as_of or last_verified date and should be rechecked before publication or
decision-making. Safety communications and identity/database assets are also
rechecked through their authoritative records when the current workflow calls
for review; the atlas does not invent one universal refresh interval.
| Claim type | Authoritative record | Refresh trigger | Staleness signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regulatory or label status | Current regulator record and official product information | Before publication or decision-making and when a regulator changes the record | The page date predates a revised label, approval, withdrawal, or regulatory action |
| Trial registry and safety | Current trial registry, published study record, retraction or termination record, and official safety communication | A trial changes status, results appear, or a safety record changes | Recruitment, completion, results, termination, retraction, or safety status no longer matches the cited record |
| WADA and legal status | Current WADA material and the relevant jurisdiction's official legal or regulatory record | Before publication or decision-making and when a new list or rule takes effect | The cited season, effective date, rule, or jurisdictional status is no longer current |
| Identity and database assets | PubChem, DrugBank, UniProt, source sidecars, and the structure manifest as applicable | A stable record, sequence, identifier, provenance field, or asset input is revised | The cached identifier, checksum, sequence, or provenance no longer matches the authoritative record |
Regulatory and label status, trial registry and safety records, WADA and legal status, and identity or database assets each return to an authoritative source for rechecking. Frequency is defined by policy and the current workflow rather than an invented universal interval.