Skip to content
Peptide Evidence Registry

GLP-1s & incretins · Metabolic & endocrine

Eloralintide

An investigational selective amylin-pathway agonist now in a broad Phase 3 programme.

L3Early human studiesIn clinical trialsIn clinical development
How settled this rating is:
low confidence in the current evidence rating
Routes studied:
Subcutaneous injection
Also known as:
LY3841136, selective amylin receptor agonist
Last reviewed:
2026-09-06
Jump to section

Evidence passport

Eloralintide

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.

Reviewed 2026-09-06
Evidence level
L3Early human studies
Confidence
Low confidence in rating
Regulatory status
In clinical trials
Development status
In clinical development

Evidence strength

Human efficacy evidence40 of 100 evidence strength

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

Human safety evidence22 of 100 evidence strength

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
Phase III
Human research maturity
Phase 3 programme actively enrolling; published human data limited
Source curation
Sources fully curated

Routes recorded

SC injection

Overview

Human efficacy evidence strength40 of 100 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 (animal / lab) evidence strength65 of 100 evidence strength

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

Human safety evidence strength22 of 100 evidence strength

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: Phase 3 programme actively enrolling; published human data limited

Routes & formulations

Studied / approved routes

SC injection

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

  1. Discovery

  2. Preclinical

  3. Phase I

  4. Phase II

  5. Phase III

    Furthest established stage

  6. Approved

In clinical development

Multiple Phase 3 ENLIGHTEN trials listed as recruiting in 2026. No regulatory submission is established in our curated record.

Last documented development: 2026 — Phase 3 ENLIGHTEN trials recruiting

What it is

A peptide designed to act selectively on amylin receptors rather than the calcitonin receptor, aiming for satiety effects with a cleaner receptor profile than earlier amylin analogues.

What people claim

  • Weight loss without incretin-style gastrointestinal burden
  • Useful added on top of existing incretin therapy

What the evidence actually says

The interesting part of this compound is the breadth of its Phase 3 programme, not the strength of its published data. Trial registry entries confirm active late-stage testing across several conditions; that tells you a sponsor is confident, not that a benefit has been demonstrated. Treat it as an unresolved question with real trials attached.

Related evidence

Useful next reads based on this compound — not recommendations.

Human evidence

  • Phase 3 ENLIGHTEN trials registered and recruiting in obesity, type 2 diabetes, obstructive sleep apnoea, knee osteoarthritis and persistent obesity on incretin background therapy.

Preclinical evidence

  • Selective amylin receptor pharmacology and rodent satiety models.

Animal and cell findings are Level 1–2 evidence.

Mechanism and pathways

  • Selective amylin receptor signalling reduces meal size and food intake.

Safety and unknowns

  • Nausea and injection-site reactions are the expected class-level effects; comparative tolerability claims are not established.
  • No long-term human safety dataset exists.

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 established human signal

No established human cancer signal for this compound.

Regulatory status

Regulatory decisions apply to specific jurisdictions, products, formulations and indications. An approval elsewhere is not automatically an approval in your country.

Check the regulatory note and linked primary sources for jurisdiction-specific details.

Not approved anywhere. The Phase 3 ENLIGHTEN programme is enrolling across obesity, type 2 diabetes, obstructive sleep apnoea, knee osteoarthritis and people already on incretin therapy.

Evidence grade

L3Early human studiesLow confidence in rating

Preliminary human outcome research, including small or observational studies. Descriptive exposure studies alone do not demonstrate therapeutic benefit.

What would change our rating?

  • Peer-reviewed Phase 2 or Phase 3 publications.
  • Any regulatory filing or decision.

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.

Sources fully curated
Last editorial review
2026-09-06
Recently reviewed · 45 days ago
Linked curated sources
5
Sources still pending
0
External specialist reviews
0
None recorded for this profile
Trial registry: 5

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.

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 2026-09-06.