Research explained
MOTS-c Human Trials: Status, Results & Evidence Gaps
Human MOTS-c research needs three separate labels: a trial registering administered MOTS-c, a study of the analogue CB4211, and studies measuring the body’s own MOTS-c. Here is what the selected records show as checked on 20 September 2026.
By PurePeptideHub Research Team · Evidence updated
Editorial evidence update; independent clinical review pending. Editorial standards
An experimental peptide with important gaps in clinical safety and pharmacokinetic evidence. The selected sources do not establish a safe dose or reliable human dosing interval.
Evidence at a glance
Selected sources supporting this update. This is an editorial evidence summary, not a systematic review of every publication.
| Source and design | What it supports | What it cannot establish |
|---|---|---|
| Lee et al., 2015: metabolic research Cell and animal research | The investigators studied metabolic signaling and effects in experimental models. | These experiments cannot quantify side-effect rates or establish treatment benefits in people. |
| Reynolds et al., 2021: exercise and MOTS-c Animal experiments and endogenous measurements in people | The human exercise component measured circulating and muscle MOTS-c; it was not a human injection trial. | Endogenous observations do not establish the safety or half-life of an administered product. |
| FDA: MOTs-C compounding safety assessment Regulatory safety assessment | FDA describes insufficient human exposure information and potential immune-response and impurity concerns. | No established adverse-event frequency or safety assurance follows from this evidence gap. |
| ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT07505745 (MOTS-MET) Registered phase 2 intervention study; planned enrollment 120 | Record lists MOTS-c versus placebo in adults with prediabetes and overweight/obesity. Status: recruiting; last update posted April 1, 2026. | No results posted in the registry when checked September 20, 2026. A registration and its recruitment label are not proof of benefit or independently confirmed recruitment. |
| ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03998514 (CB4211) Phase 1a/1b intervention study; actual enrollment 88 | Record lists completed, with completion April 19, 2021 and last update May 11, 2021. | No results posted in this registry record at our check. It tested CB4211, not an interchangeable native MOTS-c product. |
| CohBar: CB4211 development announcement filed with SEC Sponsor disclosure, 2018 | Identifies CB4211 as an analogue of MOTS-c. | A sponsor description establishes the development context; it is not independent evidence of clinical benefit. |
MOTS-c human trials: the status and results are different fields
This is a selected-record check, not a complete systematic trial review. Recruitment and completion labels are supplied in registry records and can lag real activity. “No results posted” below refers to that registry’s results module, not a claim that no abstract or sponsor announcement exists elsewhere.
| Record | What was studied | Status or publication | What is available |
|---|---|---|---|
| NCT07505745 · MOTS-MET | Registered MOTS-c intervention; phase 2 | Recruiting in record; last update April 1, 2026 | No registry results posted; projected dates are not findings |
| NCT03998514 · CB4211 | Different molecule: MOTS-c analogue; phase 1 | Completed; last update May 11, 2021 | No registry results posted at this check |
| Reynolds et al. · 2021 | Endogenous MOTS-c around exercise in people; separate mouse interventions | Published research | Human exercise measurements, not a human MOTS-c treatment trial |
Sources: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT07505745 (MOTS-MET) · ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03998514 (CB4211) · CohBar: CB4211 development announcement filed with SEC · Reynolds et al., 2021: exercise and MOTS-c
What side effects does MOTS-c have in humans?
The sources reviewed here do not provide a dependable frequency table of side effects from administered MOTS-c. An honest answer distinguishes an identified concern from a quantified clinical risk. A short list of anecdotes cannot establish which reactions are caused by the compound or how often they occur.
Human research is not always a human treatment trial
A paper can include human participants while measuring a peptide already present in their bodies. Check whether investigators administered a substance, measured an endogenous signal, or tested an analogue. These designs should not be collapsed into one claim that a product was tested in people.
What is the half-life of MOTS-c?
The selected sources do not establish a reliable human pharmacokinetic half-life for administered MOTS-c. Changes in endogenous levels after exercise do not supply that number. We leave the human value unresolved rather than turn a frequently repeated estimate into a dosing interval.
Does exercise-related biology prove an exercise replacement?
No. An association with exercise biology or an effect in an animal experiment does not establish that a product reproduces the clinical benefits of training. The outcome, population and intervention must match the claim.
How to assess a new safety claim
Ask for the original study, molecule or analogue, route, participant count, comparator, adverse-event reporting and follow-up. A trial registration describes a plan; completed results are needed to assess what actually happened. If a source concerns a different analogue, label that difference explicitly.
Common questions
Are there any registered human trials of MOTS-c?
The record NCT07505745 lists a phase 2 MOTS-c intervention study. At our September 20, 2026 check it was labeled recruiting, with no registry results posted. Keep that distinct from established efficacy and from the completed CB4211 analogue study.
Does a lack of reported side effects mean MOTS-c is safe?
No. Sparse exposure data and incomplete follow-up can leave adverse effects undetected. Unknown frequency is not zero frequency.
Can a half-life calculator supply the missing human value?
No. Our tool calculates decay from an input you provide. It does not discover a compound’s pharmacokinetics.
Are testimonials evidence of causation?
They can raise questions, but cannot reliably separate a compound’s effects from other exposures, measurement error or changes that would have occurred anyway.
Continue your research
Educational information only. This page does not recommend a medicine, dose or injection protocol. Report a correction with its source.