Skip to content
Peptide Evidence Registry

Comparison Centre

Two compounds, the same questions, no cherry-picking

Marketing compares compounds on whichever measure flatters them. This compares them on the same fields every time — including the awkward ones like how much human safety data exists. Every score here rates the evidence, not the compound: a higher number means stronger or more mature research, not that something is safer or works better.

Sharing keeps the two compounds you picked.

How to read these scores

Every number here rates the evidence, not the compound. They are editorial 0-100 strength ratings, not percentages, and not a rating out of five stars.

  • Human efficacy evidence strength — Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
  • Preclinical evidence strength — Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.
  • Human safety evidence strength — Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number. A score of 80 does not mean “80% safe”.
  • Evidence level (L0-L5) — the strongest type of study behind the compound, from anecdote (L0) to large replicated human trials (L5). It is a description of the study evidence, not a quality, safety or recommendation rating.
  • Confidence — how likely we think it is that this rating changes as new research lands. Low confidence means the picture is unsettled, not that the compound is bad.

None of these ratings is medical advice, a safety guarantee, or a recommendation to use anything. How we grade evidence.

VRX-0075

A preclinical single-molecule agonist reported to engage five receptors — GLP-1, GIP, glucagon, amylin and calcitonin — with no human data of any kind.

L2Animal / lab studiesResearch / unapproved supply
Full profile

AT-7687

An investigational peptide GIP receptor antagonist — it blocks the GIP receptor rather than activating it — in a Phase 2a study combined with semaglutide.

L2Animal / lab studiesIn clinical trials
Full profile

How far human research has progressed

VRX-0075

Preclinical. A rodent study reported in an American Diabetes Association 2026 abstract (2839-LB); no Phase 1 trial is established in our curated record

AT-7687

Phase 2a in combination with semaglutide; first patient dosed 28 July 2026 (sponsor-reported). No results

Claim-specific benefit evidence

A human exposure study or trial registration does not establish that the claimed benefit occurs.

VRX-0075

Not separately assessed; see the full profile.

AT-7687

Not separately assessed; see the full profile.

Human research context

VRX-0075

Preclinical. A rodent study reported in an American Diabetes Association 2026 abstract (2839-LB); no Phase 1 trial is established in our curated record

AT-7687

Phase 2a in combination with semaglutide; first patient dosed 28 July 2026 (sponsor-reported). No results

Human efficacy evidence strength

Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.

VRX-0075

Strength of the human efficacy evidence0 of 100 evidence strength

AT-7687

Strength of the human efficacy evidence15 of 100 evidence strength

Preclinical (animal / lab) evidence strength

Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.

VRX-0075

Strength of the animal and lab evidence35 of 100 evidence strength

AT-7687

Strength of the animal and lab evidence40 of 100 evidence strength

Human safety evidence strength

Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.

VRX-0075

Strength of the human safety evidence0 of 100 evidence strength

AT-7687

Strength of the human safety evidence12 of 100 evidence strength

Regulatory status (legal position, not proof it works)

VRX-0075

Check jurisdiction-specific details in the profile.

Not approved anywhere and not in human trials in our curated record. Our record establishes a conference abstract describing animal work; it does not establish an IND, a registered trial or any regulatory review.

AT-7687

Check jurisdiction-specific details in the profile.

Not approved anywhere. A Phase 2a study is an early exploratory efficacy and safety study; it does not establish benefit.

Common claims

VRX-0075

  • · More powerful than retatrutide
  • · The next generation of weight-loss injections
  • · 'GLP-5' is a new class of drug
  • · Renamed or hidden by a large pharmaceutical company

AT-7687

  • · Blocking GIP is better than activating it
  • · Boosts semaglutide weight loss

How settled our evidence rating is

VRX-0075

Very low confidence in ratingL2Animal / lab studies

AT-7687

Very low confidence in ratingL2Animal / lab studies

Cancer-related questions raised by the biology

These are theoretical or monitored questions raised by how a compound works. They are not evidence that it causes cancer.

VRX-0075

Not established in either direction. No human data exist, so no cancer signal can be claimed or excluded.

AT-7687

Not established. No human data exist in either direction.

What this adds up to, in plain English

VRX-0075

The interesting work is in animals and lab studies. Treating it as an established human treatment is not supported by evidence.

AT-7687

The interesting work is in animals and lab studies. Treating it as an established human treatment is not supported by evidence.

A comparison is not a recommendation

Neither column here is an endorsement, and the compound with the higher numbers is not the “better” or “safer” one — it is simply the one with more or better-quality research behind it. Two compounds can both be poorly evidenced, and better-evidenced says nothing about whether either is a sensible idea for a specific person. That is a conversation for a qualified clinician.