Skip to content
Terminus Peptides
  • Research use only — not for human or veterinary use
  • 55 compound profiles, every source cited
  • 62 research materials listed
  • Prices published, not hidden behind an enquiry
  • Vials and pre-filled pens
  • Dispatched and supported from the UK
  • Every profile states its UK regulatory status

Research profile · Peptide

Epitalon

Also known as Epithalon, AEDG, Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly

Animal — evidence level 2 of 4: Animal evidenceExperimental — UK regulatory status: Experimental — not authorised for human use in the UK

Overview

A synthetic tetrapeptide developed as a defined analogue of a pineal extract, studied almost entirely by a single research programme.

Category
Peptide
Highest evidence level identified
Animal evidence
Last scientifically reviewed
19 August 2026
Last regulatory review
19 August 2026

Mechanism under investigation

Epitalon is a synthetic tetrapeptide developed as a defined analogue of the pineal extract epithalamin. Its proposed mechanism is epigenetic: the peptide is suggested to bind DNA and linker histones, altering chromatin accessibility at promoter regions including that of the telomerase catalytic subunit. This mechanism remains proposed rather than established — it rests largely on molecular-modelling and cell-culture work from a single research programme and has not been independently confirmed.

Research areas

  • Ageing research
  • Telomere biology

These are fields in which the compound has been investigated. Listing a field is not a statement that anything was demonstrated within it.

Current evidence

In-vitro evidence

Cells, tissues or biochemical systems outside a living organism.

The core claim is that the peptide induces telomerase expression and telomere elongation in telomerase-negative human fetal fibroblasts, with a follow-up reporting additional passages beyond the point where control cultures ceased dividing. Both reports sit in low-impact journals and originate with the same group.

Animal evidence

Studies in living non-human animals.

Rodent work reports reduced spontaneous tumour incidence and preserved oestrous cyclicity. The lifespan findings are weaker than commonly claimed: the principal mouse study explicitly found no effect on mean lifespan, with modest increases only in maximum lifespan and in the last surviving decile.

Human observational evidence

Studies observing people without assigning an intervention.

No substantial published work exists at this level.

Clinical-trial evidence

Studies assigning an intervention to human participants.

Essentially absent. One record across the whole literature carries a clinical-trial publication type — a 2002 retinitis pigmentosa report from the originating group, unregistered, with no described randomisation or blinding. ClinicalTrials.gov returns no registered studies under either spelling of the name.

Study limitations

  • Single-source literature: 88 of 126 indexed records list one of two authors from the originating programme. This is one research programme rather than a field.
  • The flagship telomerase finding has not been independently replicated in over twenty years, and is published in low-impact journals.
  • Lifespan claims outrun the data. The best-documented rodent study found no effect on mean lifespan; popular summaries frequently misreport this.
  • No trial registration exists anywhere, so there are no pre-specified endpoints and no way to assess selective reporting.

UK regulatory context

Experimental — not authorised for human use in the UK

A compound appearing in research literature that holds no UK authorisation for human use in any indication.

Source: The Human Medicines Regulations 2012, regulation 46 — prohibition on sale or supply of an unauthorised medicinal product (opens legislation.gov.uk in a new tab) (legislation.gov.uk)

Regulatory classification is jurisdiction-specific. A compound authorised elsewhere is not thereby authorised in the UK, and a supplier’s description of a substance does not determine how it is classified in law. See safety and regulation for the framework and the authoritative sources.

Safety and interpretation

No adequately powered or independently conducted human safety study has been published, and no regulator has assessed the compound. Reported tolerability derives from small studies by the originating group. The absence of reported harm reflects the absence of systematic investigation rather than evidence of safety.

References