AOD-9604 vs CJC-1295
Research Verdict
Neither compound has a universal evidence advantage. Both peptides serve distinct research goals with comparable evidence; choose by target mechanism.
Quick Answers
Which is better, AOD-9604 or CJC-1295?
Neither compound has a universal evidence advantage. Both peptides serve distinct research goals with comparable evidence; choose by target mechanism.
What is the key difference between AOD-9604 and CJC-1295?
CJC-1295 is a GHRH analog stimulating pituitary GH release; AOD-9604 is a GH fragment (hGH176-191) that was designed to have lipolytic effects without GH activity. They target different parts of the GH axis with fundamentally different mechanisms.
Evidence Comparison
CJC-1295: Phase 2 data (Ionescu & Frohman 2006) showing sustained GH and IGF-1 elevation. AOD-9604: completed Phase 3 but failed primary efficacy endpoint for obesity; subsequently gained GRAS status as a food ingredient. CJC-1295 has positive Phase 2 efficacy data; AOD-9604 has negative Phase 3 efficacy data - different failures.
Evidence Context Favoring AOD-9604
GH fragment or lipolysis-specific research, with full awareness of the Phase 3 efficacy failure.
Evidence Context Favoring CJC-1295
GH secretagogue research where the goal is to stimulate endogenous GH release and IGF-1 elevation.
Side-by-Side Snapshot
| Evidence grade | AOD-9604: Level D CJC-1295: Level B |
|---|---|
| Research status | AOD-9604: Preclinical CJC-1295: Phase 2 |
| Primary category | AOD-9604: Weight Loss & Metabolic CJC-1295: Growth Hormone |
| Cited studies | AOD-9604: 2 CJC-1295: 1 |