Prolonged Stimulation of Growth Hormone (GH) and Insulin-Like Growth Factor I Secretion by CJC-1295, a Long-Acting Analog of GH-Releasing Hormone, in Healthy Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Therapeutic use of GHRH to enhance GH secretion is limited by its short duration of action. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the pharmacokinetic profile, pharmacodynamic effects, and safety of CJC-1295, a long-acting GHRH analog. DESIGN: The study design was two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, ascending dose trials with durations of 28 and 49 d. SETTING: The study was performed at two investigational sites. PARTICIPANTS: Healthy subjects, ages 21-61 yr, were studied. INTERVENTIONS: CJC-1295 or placebo was administered sc in one of four ascending single doses in the first study and in two or three weekly or biweekly doses in the second study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were peak concentrations and area under the curve of GH and IGF-I; standard pharmacokinetic parameters were used for CJC-1295. RESULTS: After a single injection of CJC-1295, there were dose-dependent increases in mean plasma GH concentrations by 2- to 10-fold for 6 d or more and in mean plasma IGF-I concentrations by 1.5- to 3-fold for 9-11 d. The estimated half-life of CJC-1295 was 5.8-8.1 d. After multiple CJC-1295 doses, mean IGF-I levels remained above baseline for up to 28 d. No serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous administration of CJC-1295 resulted in sustained, dose-dependent increases in GH and IGF-I levels in healthy adults and was safe and relatively well tolerated, particularly at doses of 30 or 60 microg/kg. There was evidence of a cumulative effect after multiple doses. These data support the potential utility of CJC-1295 as a therapeutic agent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".