Metabolic & endocrine
Desmopressin
A V2-selective vasopressin analogue approved in nasal, oral and injectable formulations — each tied to its own specific indications.
- How settled this rating is:
- high confidence in the current evidence rating
- Routes studied:
- Nasal, Oral, Intravenous, Subcutaneous injection
- Also known as:
- DDAVP, desmopressin acetate, Stimate, Nocdurna
- Last reviewed:
- 2026-08-23
Jump to section
Evidence passport
Desmopressin
A one-screen evidence identity for this compound. These fields describe research maturity, confidence and legal status. They are not a safety guarantee, efficacy percentage or recommendation.
- Evidence level
- L5Repeated human trials
- Confidence
- High confidence in rating
- Regulatory status
- Approved medicine (jurisdiction-specific) · See jurisdiction details
- Development status
- Approved
Evidence strength
Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.
The 0-100 values rate the strength and maturity of evidence, not how effective or safe the compound is.
- Evidence base
- Includes human studies
- Furthest established stage
- Approved
- Human research maturity
- Long-established approved medicine family (multiple formulations)
- Source curation
- Sources fully curated
Routes recorded
Overview
Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.
Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.
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.
How far human research has progressed: Long-established approved medicine family (multiple formulations)
Routes & formulations
Studied / approved routes
Nasal, oral and injectable desmopressin products exist with different approved indications; a formulation approved for one use is not evidence for another. The haemostatic (clotting-factor-releasing) use belongs to specific injectable and high-concentration nasal products, not to every desmopressin formulation.
Route availability is not evidence of efficacy, and evidence from one route does not transfer to another. The Registry never provides dosing or sourcing information.
Peptide lifecycle
Discovery
Preclinical
Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
Approved
What it is
A synthetic analogue of the natural antidiuretic hormone vasopressin, modified to act selectively on V2 receptors — reducing urine output and, via a separate endothelial effect, raising certain clotting factors.
What people claim
- Controls excessive urination in central diabetes insipidus
- Reduces night-time urine production in specific labelled indications
- Supports haemostasis in certain mild bleeding disorders
What the evidence actually says
One of the clearest demonstrations that peptide medicines can work by nasal, oral and injectable routes — but each formulation was approved on its own evidence, for its own indications. Hyponatraemia (low blood sodium) is the key labelled risk and the reason fluid-management advice sits in its labelling.
Related evidence
Useful next reads based on this compound — not recommendations.
- Related compound
Vasopressin evidence profile
The body's own antidiuretic nonapeptide, used intravenously in intensive care to support blood pressure in vasodilatory shock.
- Compare
Compare Desmopressin vs Vasopressin evidence
Same questions, same fields, side by side — including how much human evidence exists.
- Context
Safety Centre
What approved, investigational and unapproved actually mean for documented human safety.
- Context
Research Desk
How to read animal, early-phase and controlled human studies without over-reading them.
Human evidence
- Decades of controlled trials and post-marketing use across approved indications.
- Randomised trials support specific nocturia and central diabetes insipidus indications for specific products.
Preclinical evidence
- Receptor pharmacology establishing V2 selectivity over V1 pressor effects.
Animal and cell findings are Level 1–2 evidence.
Mechanism and pathways
- V2-receptor agonism in the kidney collecting duct increases water reabsorption.
- Endothelial V2 stimulation releases von Willebrand factor and factor VIII, underpinning labelled haemostatic uses.
Safety and unknowns
- Hyponatraemia, sometimes severe, is the central labelled risk; fluid advice accompanies treatment.
- Formulation and indication matter: contraindications and monitoring differ between products.
Cancer relevance
This section covers questions raised by how the compound works in the body, plus anything regulators and trial teams keep an eye on. It is not a statement that this compound causes cancer — for most compounds here, no human data exist in either direction.
No concern identified
Regulatory status
Regulatory decisions apply to specific jurisdictions, products, formulations and indications. An approval elsewhere is not automatically an approval in your country.
Named regulators: FDA (US)
Approved in the US and many other markets, but approvals are formulation- and indication-specific: for example products for central diabetes insipidus and certain nocturia indications, and specific injectable and high-concentration nasal products for haemostatic use in certain bleeding disorders. No single product covers every indication.
Evidence grade
Substantial, consistent controlled human evidence supporting a specified outcome, preferably independently replicated. Approval is reported separately.
What would change our rating?
- Not applicable at this evidence tier.
References and sources
Source transparency
A provenance snapshot of this profile. Counts show what kinds of sources are cited, not how much scientific weight each source deserves.
- Last editorial review
- 2026-08-23
- Recently reviewed · 54 days ago
- Linked curated sources
- 2
- Sources still pending
- 0
- External specialist reviews
- 0
- None recorded for this profile
Review provenance
Registry editorial review: Colin Jackson-White, creator and editor, who is not a doctor or clinician. External specialist review is credited only when a named reviewer has completed a review of this exact profile.
Literature-discovery and AI tools may help locate or challenge candidate evidence, but they are not counted as evidence sources here. Registry judgements are tied to the underlying papers, trial records, regulator documents and official study records.
- Regulatory / labelFDA label: DDAVP (desmopressin acetate) injection and rhinal tube
- Regulatory / labelFDA Orphan Drug Designations and Approvals: desmopressin listing
Source hierarchy: regulatory documents and trial registries first, peer-reviewed work next, sponsor material flagged as non-independent. We never use supplier or clinic marketing as evidence, and where a verified source has not yet been curated we say so rather than inventing one.
Evidence change history
These entries record changes to our assessment of the published evidence — not changes to the compound itself.
No recorded changes yet. Baseline position set on 2026-08-23.