what is cjc-1295?
one peptide name, two very different molecules: no-DAC and DAC, and the chemistry that splits them
one name, two drugs
CJC-1295 is the name shared by two related but pharmacologically distinct synthetic peptides built on the GHRH(1-29) backbone. The no-DAC variant, also called modified GRF(1-29), has a roughly 30 minute plasma half-life and is dosed daily. The DAC variant carries a maleimide linker that bolts the peptide onto albumin in vivo, stretching its effective half-life to 6 to 8 days (Teichman et al. 2006; Jetté et al. 2005).
Both variants act upstream at the pituitary GHRH receptor to ask the body to release its own growth hormone. CJC-1295 came out of ConjuChem Biotechnologies in the early 2000s and has a single published Phase I trial in healthy adults plus a halted Phase II trial in HIV-associated lipodystrophy (NCT00267527; AIDSmap 2006). The molecule sits on the FDA 503A Category 2 list for significant safety concerns and is named on the WADA Prohibited List under S2.2 (fda_503a_bulks; WADA 2026).
cjc-1295 in plain terms
a 30-residue analog of the front half of natural GHRH, with four amino-acid swaps that protect it from the enzymes that normally chew GHRH apart in minutes.
a synthetic copy of growth hormone-releasing hormone
Natural GHRH is a 44-residue hormone made in the hypothalamus that asks the pituitary for a pulse of growth hormone. Researchers showed in the 1980s that the first 29 residues alone keep almost all of the receptor-activating power. That short fragment is called GHRH(1-29), or sermorelin when supplied as a drug (Mayo 1992).
the four substitutions that define the cjc-1295 backbone
CJC-1295 starts from GHRH(1-29) and changes four residues to fix four different failure modes. D-Ala2 blocks the DPP-IV enzyme that normally inactivates GHRH within minutes. Gln8 replaces an asparagine that tended to deamidate in the vial.
Ala15 replaces a glycine in a way that increases binding affinity at the GHRH receptor. Leu27 replaces a methionine that tended to oxidize and lose activity. Together these four swaps give you the molecule called modified GRF(1-29), which is the same backbone shared by both CJC-1295 variants (Jetté et al. 2005).
the one thing that splits the two variants
CJC-1295 no-DAC stops there. CJC-1295-DAC adds one more piece: a maleimide group on a C-terminal lysine. That single chemical handle is what bolts the peptide onto plasma albumin once it reaches the bloodstream, and it is what turns a daily peptide into a weekly one (Léger et al. 2004; Jetté et al. 2005).
no-dac vs dac: one name, two drugs
the single most important distinction in this whole course. miss this and every dose figure, every half-life, and every protocol you read online will land in the wrong column.
why "cjc-1295" alone is not enough information
When a paper, a vendor, or a forum post says "CJC-1295," you cannot tell from the name alone whether they mean a peptide with a half-life of 30 minutes or one with a half-life of 6 to 8 days. The two variants are roughly 300 times apart on the half-life axis. Their typical research dose ranges differ by about 10 times, and giving one when the other was intended is the most common community safety hazard for this molecule.
modified GRF(1-29)
- half-life: about 30 minutes in plasma
- frequency: typically 1-3 daily SubQ injections in community use
- pulsatility: each dose produces one short GH pulse, similar to sermorelin
- extra chemistry: none beyond the four backbone substitutions
- best mental model: a stabilized sermorelin
CJC-1295-DAC
- half-life: about 6-8 days via albumin binding
- frequency: typically once-weekly SubQ injection in community use
- pulsatility: raises the baseline that the body's own GH rhythm sits on top of
- extra chemistry: a maleimide linker on a C-terminal lysine that grabs albumin Cys34
- best mental model: a continuous GH "tide" instead of a single pulse
why this distinction is not pedantic
CJC-1295-DAC at the standard weekly research dose of about 1 to 2 mg and CJC-1295 no-DAC at the standard daily dose of about 100 to 200 mcg represent very different loads on the GH axis. A vendor mislabel that swaps the two would deliver either ten times the intended weekly burden, or essentially no effect (Teichman et al. 2006; Sigalos and Pastuszak 2018).
For the rest of this course, every dose, half-life, or pulsatility claim explicitly names the variant. If a sentence does not say "no-DAC" or "DAC," assume it refers to both.
key terms
definitions for the technical words that show up across this course. tap to expand.
interactive: variant toggle
switch between no-DAC and CJC-1295-DAC to compare half-life, dosing frequency, pulsatility, mass, and primary use case side by side.
tap to switch between the no-DAC and DAC variants and see how dose, half-life, and GH pulse shape change
the conjuchem development story
where cjc-1295 came from, why the dac platform was novel, and how a promising albumin-tethered ghrh analog ended up halted at phase ii.
conjuchem and the dac platform (~2004-2008)
CJC-1295 was developed by ConjuChem Biotechnologies, a Montreal company, in the early 2000s. Its proprietary Drug Affinity Complex platform was designed to solve a generic problem in peptide drug development: small peptides clear from blood in minutes, which forces continuous infusion or constant injections. ConjuChem first validated DAC chemistry with a GLP-1 analog called CJC-1131, then applied the same maleimide-Cys34 strategy to GHRH(1-29) to create CJC-1295-DAC (Léger et al. 2004; Jetté et al. 2005).
the long-acting ghrh hypothesis
The central pharmacologic hypothesis was that a long-acting GHRH analog could deliver sustained GH-axis stimulation without the side effects of recombinant GH. Sermorelin and native GHRH(1-29) had 3 to 10 minute half-lives, which made any sustained-elevation use case impractical. CJC-1295-DAC was meant to prove that an albumin-tethered GHRH peptide could keep IGF-1 elevated for a week per dose (Teichman et al. 2006).
teichman 2006: the one anchor trial
The pivotal evidence is a single Phase I single-ascending-dose study in healthy adults, published by Teichman and colleagues in 2006. A single subcutaneous CJC-1295-DAC dose produced 2- to 10-fold elevations in mean GH and 1.5- to 3-fold elevations in IGF-1 lasting 6 to 11 days. This is still the strongest direct CJC-1295 human dataset.
the phase ii halt
ConjuChem ran a Phase II trial in HIV-associated lipodystrophy (NCT00267527) enrolling 192 participants on weekly CJC-1295-DAC dose escalation. The study was halted in July 2006 after a cardiovascular death at an Argentina site. The on-site physician attributed the death to pre-existing coronary disease rather than the study drug, but ConjuChem discontinued development and no CJC-1295 trial has been registered since (NCT00267527; AIDSmap 2006).
why community stacks pick cjc-1295
cjc-1295 dominates community gh-axis stacks despite a thin trial record. understanding why is the regulatory and popularity hook for this course.
the practical pull
Among GHRH analogs reaching the gray-market peptide research-chemical economy, CJC-1295-DAC stands out for two practical reasons. Weekly dosing is more convenient than daily sermorelin or daily no-DAC injections. The Phase I data document real, measurable IGF-1 elevation for over a week per dose, which translates into a strong perceived effect (Teichman et al. 2006).
once-weekly DAC convenience
CJC-1295-DAC's roughly 6 to 8 day half-life means one injection per week instead of one to three injections per day. That single fact carries a lot of the pull for community users compared with sermorelin or the no-DAC variant.
measurable IGF-1 elevation
A single CJC-1295-DAC dose holds IGF-1 elevated for 9 to 11 days, per Teichman 2006. That is a real biomarker effect users can feel and (if they choose) measure, which anchors the molecule's reputation more solidly than purely anecdotal peptides.
the CJC + IPA stack story
The dominant community combination pairs CJC-1295 with ipamorelin, a selective ghrelin-receptor agonist. The synergy story rests on real human data showing GHRH plus GHRP combinations release more GH than either alone (Bowers et al. 1990; Raun et al. 1998).
FDA 503A Category 2 and WADA banned
CJC-1295 was placed in FDA 503A Category 2 in September 2023, flagging significant safety concerns; the 2024 removal was procedural, not safety-cleared (fda_503a_bulks). WADA names CJC-1295 explicitly under S2.2, prohibited in- and out-of-competition for all sports (WADA 2026).
WADA 2026 Prohibited List -- Section S2.2
"Growth hormone (GH), its fragments and releasing factors ... including CJC-1295 ... are prohibited at all times, in- and out-of-competition."
CJC-1295 is named explicitly on the WADA 2026 Prohibited List under section S2.2 (GH releasing factors). Any athlete subject to USADA, NCAA, or military testing inherits this prohibition (WADA 2026).
honest evidence ceiling
what is solid for cjc-1295, what is class-level extrapolation, what is community-level, and what has simply never been studied in adequately powered trials.
phase i PK/PD of CJC-1295-DAC
A single Phase I trial directly characterizes the DAC variant in humans.
- a single SubQ CJC-1295-DAC dose raised GH 2- to 10-fold and IGF-1 1.5- to 3-fold in healthy adults (Teichman et al. 2006).
- IGF-1 elevation persisted 9-11 days per dose, consistent with the ~6-8 day half-life.
- pulsatility was largely preserved under continuous GHRHR stimulation across multiple doses (Ionescu and Frohman 2006).
GHRH-analog class evidence via tesamorelin
The mechanism family CJC-1295 belongs to has at least one fully developed clinical proof-of-concept.
- tesamorelin, a different GHRH analog, completed Phase III in HIV-associated lipodystrophy and reduced visceral fat by roughly 15% at 26 weeks (Falutz et al. 2007).
- this validates the GHRH-analog drug class but does not validate CJC-1295 specifically.
- once-daily CJC-1295 normalized growth in the GHRH-knockout mouse, supporting the receptor-level mechanism (Alba et al. 2006).
community body-composition and recovery claims
Biologically plausible but extrapolated from sermorelin, rhGH, and tesamorelin literature, plus anecdote.
- community CJC + IPA stack reports of lean-mass gain, fat reduction, and sleep depth rest on extrapolation, not direct CJC-1295 RCTs.
- GH secretagogue use raised IGF-1 in hypogonadal men (Sigalos et al. 2017) but did not measure body composition with controls.
- the broader healthy-elderly rhGH literature shows small body-composition shifts plus dose-limiting adverse events (Sigalos and Pastuszak 2018).
modern controlled human RCTs of CJC-1295
As of 2026, none of the following exist at scale.
- no completed Phase III trial; ConjuChem Phase II in HIV-lipodystrophy was halted in 2006 before pivotal readout (NCT00267527; AIDSmap 2006).
- no head-to-head trial of CJC-1295 no-DAC vs DAC, or of either variant vs sermorelin or tesamorelin.
- no controlled long-term safety dataset beyond the Phase II window.
- no controlled trial of the CJC + IPA community stack or of CJC-1295 in adult GHD.
what you will learn
where this course goes from here.
The next nine units take this unit's overview and go much deeper. The chemistry unit dissects the modified GRF(1-29) backbone and the Lys30 maleimide linker. The DAC mechanism unit walks through the maleimide-Cys34 chemistry step by step.
The clinical evidence unit is the marquee unit and spends its whole runtime on the Teichman 2006 Phase I trial and the ConjuChem Phase II halt.
-
02
chemistry and structure
the modified GRF(1-29) backbone, the four substitutions (D-Ala2, Gln8, Ala15, Leu27), and the Lys30 maleimidopropionic linker that defines the DAC variant.
-
03
the DAC mechanism
deep dive on maleimide-cysteine chemistry, albumin Cys34 covalent binding, and how a roughly 3.6 kDa peptide inherits albumin's ~19-day half-life via FcRn recycling.
-
04
pulsatility vs sustained GH
why native GH is pulsatile, how the no-DAC variant amplifies natural pulses, how the DAC variant raises baseline GH continuously, and the tachyphylaxis question on chronic DAC dosing.
-
05
clinical evidence
the marquee evidence unit. Teichman 2006 Phase I PK/PD, Ionescu and Frohman 2006 pulsatility data, Alba 2006 GHRH-knockout-mouse rescue, and the ConjuChem Phase II HIV-lipodystrophy halt in detail.
-
06
stack strategy
Bowers 1990 GHRH plus GHRP synergy, the CJC plus ipamorelin community stack rationale, no-DAC vs DAC dose framing, and why CJC-1295 dominates community GH-axis stacks vs sermorelin.
-
07
CJC-1295 vs other GH-axis analogs
CJC-1295 (no-DAC and DAC) compared to sermorelin, tesamorelin (FDA-approved for HIV-lipodystrophy), ipamorelin, MK-677, and rhGH across mechanism, half-life, approval status, and evidence.
-
08
safety and product quality
tachyphylaxis on chronic DAC use, IGF-1 elevation and the acromegaly-shape risk, glucose handling, and the CJC-1295-unique no-DAC vs DAC vendor-mislabeling problem.
-
09
administration and regulatory status
subcutaneous dosing (once-weekly DAC vs 1-3x daily no-DAC), BAC water reconstitution, the FDA 503A Category 2 listing, and the WADA S2.2 prohibition.
-
10
final exam and certification
comprehensive exam covering all nine prior units. pass and earn a CJC-1295 Specialist certificate.
By the end you should be able to read a paper, a Reddit post, or a vendor page about CJC-1295 and immediately tell which claims have direct trial evidence behind them, which are extrapolated from tesamorelin or rhGH, and which are pure marketing. You should also never confuse the no-DAC and DAC variants again.
Knowledge Check
confirm the no-DAC vs DAC distinction, the DAC linker headline, the ConjuChem trial record, and the evidence-ceiling tiers before moving deeper.
Practice
reinforce the distinctions that matter most for the rest of the course.