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 analogue

Sermorelin

Also known as GHRH(1-29), Geref

Clinical — evidence level 4 of 4: Established clinical evidenceExperimental — UK regulatory status: Experimental — not authorised for human use in the UK

Overview

Synthetic growth hormone-releasing hormone fragment, formerly a licensed medicine in the United States for paediatric growth hormone deficiency.

Category
Peptide analogue
Highest evidence level identified
Established clinical evidence
Last scientifically reviewed
20 August 2026
Last regulatory review
20 August 2026

Mechanism under investigation

Sermorelin is the synthetic N-terminal 29-amino-acid fragment of growth hormone-releasing hormone, the portion that retains the sequence’s biological activity. It acts as an agonist at pituitary receptors for that hormone, stimulating synthesis and release of growth hormone in a manner dependent on intact pituitary function. Its historical clinical role was as a diagnostic agent for assessing growth hormone secretory capacity and, formerly, as a treatment for growth hormone deficiency in children.

Research areas

  • Pituitary endocrinology
  • Diagnostic testing

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.

Present but historical, forming part of the characterisation literature from the 1980s and 1990s rather than a current active field.

Animal evidence

Studies in living non-human animals.

Present but historical, largely predating and supporting the original licensing programme.

Human observational evidence

Studies observing people without assigning an intervention.

Essentially absent for current uses. Despite being widely marketed for ageing and body composition, no observational cohort evidence for those uses was located.

Clinical-trial evidence

Studies assigning an intervention to human participants.

Genuine controlled human trials exist, but only for paediatric growth hormone deficiency and diagnostic testing, and they are three decades old. A head-to-head comparison against growth hormone in children with deficiency found growth hormone clearly superior, with mean height velocity of 14.6 cm per year against 9.2 to 9.3 for sermorelin. A separate study found intranasal administration unsuitable in children, with declining effectiveness, antibody development and local reactions. No controlled trial supports use in adults for ageing, body composition, sleep or recovery.

Study limitations

  • The evidence level applies only to the historical paediatric deficiency and diagnostic indications. For the ageing and body-composition uses the compound is now marketed for, the correct level is effectively none.
  • The controlled trial evidence is from the early 1990s in children with diagnosed deficiency — a population and indication with no bearing on healthy adults.
  • The head-to-head paediatric trial found sermorelin less effective than growth hormone itself, which is the opposite of how its historical licence is usually invoked in marketing.
  • Its mechanism depends on intact pituitary function, so findings in deficient children do not transfer to adults with a normally functioning axis.
  • Withdrawal from the market for commercial reasons means it never accumulated the long-term safety dataset a currently licensed medicine would carry, and no trials have been conducted since.

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: Determination That GEREF (Sermorelin Acetate) Injection Was Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness (opens govinfo.gov in a new tab) (US Food and Drug Administration, Federal Register)

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

The historical regulatory record indicates the product was not removed from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness, which is meaningful but is not a positive long-term safety finding in healthy adults. The paediatric trial literature documented real tolerability problems with intranasal administration, including antibody development and local reactions. Because no controlled study has examined the uses for which it is currently promoted, neither its benefits nor its risks in that context have been established.

References