Lot-document scope confirmed before quotation · Research use only
  • Specification Review
  • Lot Documents on Request
  • Business Support · Xi’an
  • Destination Eligibility Confirmed
西安诺和达生物科技有限公司

Canonical product evidence map

BPC-157 Evidence Map

A source-linked map that keeps animal, cell, review and FDA compounding records separate for BPC-157.

33
unique source records
7
research types
2008–2026
source-year range

Evidence distribution

See the source mix before reading the conclusions.

A large record count does not imply mature human evidence. The model and source type determine which question a record can answer.

Research type

Research record18
Laboratory study6
Preclinical study3
Narrative review2
Regulatory or database record2
Systematic review1
Human clinical study1

Study model

Not specified18
Analytical / material5
Animal3
Mixed / review2
Regulatory / database2
Preclinical evidence synthesis1
In vitro1
Human1

Source-linked records

33 records connected to BPC-157

Records are deduplicated by canonical source URL and keep their model, type and evidence-tier labels visible.

010
Level 3 — Preclinical in vivoAnimal2014

Primary publication — PubMed 25415472

Chang CH, Tsai WC, Hsu YH, Pang JH. Pentadecapeptide BPC 157 enhances the growth hormone receptor expression in tendon fibroblasts. Molecules. 2014;19(11):19066-19077. doi:10.3390/molecules191119066. PMID:25415472.

Preclinical studyRat-derived tendon fibroblast studyOpen source ↗

Evidence boundary

A source set is not a clinical recommendation.

  • Human, animal, in-vitro, analytical, registry and regulatory records remain separate evidence categories.
  • A published intervention or approved finished medicine does not verify the identity or quality of a catalog research lot.
  • Record inclusion does not mean every finding has been independently replicated or applies outside its stated population and model.

Continue researching

Move between identity, status and analytical meaning.

BPC-157 evidence: separate cell, animal and human studies

When looking at BPC-157 data, first ask whether the research was done in cells, animals, or humans, then look at what it actually measured. The same material name cannot link different levels of evidence into one proven efficacy conclusion.

Cell data is suitable for investigating specific processes

The 2014 experiment used fibroblasts isolated from the Achilles tendons of male Sprague-Dawley rats. The authors measured growth-hormone-receptor mRNA and protein levels, then examined proliferation-related readouts after adding growth hormone. Figure 1 used BPC-157 at 0, 0.1, 0.25 and 0.5 μg/mL for 24 hours. These are cell-culture conditions, not instructions for human use.

A change in one molecular marker does not automatically mean the entire tendon has recovered. Mechanistic clues and tissue outcomes should be recorded separately.

Animal data: read the model and evaluation indicators

The 2003 rat experiment compared BPC-157 with saline after Achilles tendon transection. Biomechanical, microscopic and macroscopic assessments were made on days 1, 4, 7, 10 and 14, alongside Achilles function measurements. The findings concern that injury model and do not establish efficacy in people.

For human entries, make clear what kind of study it is

When seeing human-related reports, continue checking whether they are registered clinical trials, case descriptions, observational data, or other materials, and examine the controls, samples, primary indicators, and safety records. Each record in the evidence base should give its actual type.

This reading card does not draw exhaustive conclusions about all human data, nor does it treat a large number of papers as proof that the study design is already sufficient. For status and regulatory information, check the corresponding official records separately.

Leave five fixed fields for each study

Research subject, material used, comparison object, actual measurement, unanswered questions. Readers can then see what this paper helps answer and what still needs to be checked separately.

When associating BPC-157 with catalog products, only help confirm material specifications and information communication; batch quality requires corresponding batch records and cannot be replaced by research papers.

How to read the three levels of evidence separately
CellsCan focus on viewing: Specific readings such as receptors, signaling, and migrationNeed to check separately: Whole-tissue and human results
AnimalsCan focus on viewing: Tissue, function, or other indicators in the modelNeed to check separately: Reproducible human results and scope of application
HumansCan focus on viewing: Study design, controls, samples, and safety recordsNeed to check separately: Specific product identity and batch information
Teaching summary. Check the explanation and original sources; this is not a to-scale molecular model or a product test result.
How to read the three levels of evidence separately
LevelCan focus on viewingNeed to check separately
CellsSpecific readings such as receptors, signaling, and migrationWhole-tissue and human results
AnimalsTissue, function, or other indicators in the modelReproducible human results and scope of application
HumansStudy design, controls, samples, and safety recordsSpecific product identity and batch information

Original sources and further reading

Sources checked on 2026-10-13. Findings apply to the models and materials studied. Batch quality requires records for the actual batch.

Related research materials

Inquire about specifications, quantity, and required information