Does KPV Peptide Actually Calm Inflammation in the Gut?

In July 2026 an FDA advisory committee voted to recommend KPV for the list of substances that compounding pharmacies are allowed to work with. Search volume for the peptide has been at an all time high ever since. Clinics started putting it on their menus. Vendors started calling it FDA backed.

That framing is wrong, and the gap between what the research shows and what gets sold is wider here than with almost any peptide I have looked at. KPV has real, well characterised anti-inflammatory data. It also has zero human trials, no published half life, and a delivery problem that most of the products on the market quietly ignore.

What the FDA actually voted on in July 2026

On 23 and 24 July 2026, the Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee met to consider seven peptides for the Section 503A bulk drug substances list: BPC-157, KPV, TB-500, MOTS-c, Semax, Epitalon and Emideltide.

The genuinely newsworthy part is not that KPV passed. It is that the FDA's own staff had recommended rejecting every single one of the fourteen substance and form combinations on the agenda, and the committee overruled them on six of seven. KPV cleared by 8 votes to 6 with one abstention, the same margin as BPC-157 and TB-500. MOTS-c went through 7 to 5. Only Emideltide was voted down.

Those are narrow, contested margins, not a consensus.

What a 503A listing would and would not do

If the FDA eventually acts on this, state licensed compounding pharmacies would be able to use KPV in patient specific prescriptions. That is the whole of it.

It is not drug approval. It does not require trial grade evidence of safety or efficacy. There is no FDA reviewed label, no prescribing information, and no authorisation to manufacture the stuff commercially outside individual prescriptions.

More to the point, none of it has happened yet. A committee vote is advice. Before anything changes the FDA has to run formal notice and comment rulemaking, which means a proposed rule in the Federal Register, a comment period, and a final rule. As of today no final rule has been published. Rulemaking on this scale runs to a year or more, and it can still land the other way.

Why enclomiphene is the cautionary tale

The same committee looked at enclomiphene citrate in June 2022 and rejected it 4 to 8. Four years later enclomiphene is still sitting in regulatory limbo, still only available through a grey compounding channel, still not on the list.

A committee loss cost enclomiphene years. There is no reason to assume a narrow committee win buys KPV anything faster.

For what it is worth in a testing context, KPV is not named on the WADA prohibited list the way BPC-157 and TB-500 are. That is not the reassurance it sounds like. The S0 category sweeps in any pharmacological substance with no health authority approval for human use, which describes KPV precisely. Assume it is prohibited.

What KPV is, and why it does not tan you

KPV is not a designed drug. It is literally the tail end of a hormone you already make. Alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone is thirteen amino acids long, and KPV is residues eleven through thirteen: lysine, proline, valine. Researchers isolated the fragment specifically because it keeps the anti-inflammatory activity of the parent hormone while dropping the pigmentary action (Brzoska et al., 2008).

That last part matters for a bodybuilding audience, because plenty of people see alpha-MSH and immediately think Melanotan.

How it blocks inflammation

NF-kB is the transcription factor that turns on most of the inflammatory programme. Under normal conditions it sits inactive in the cytoplasm, held there by an inhibitor protein. When an inflammatory signal arrives, the inhibitor is degraded, NF-kB moves into the nucleus, and the cell starts producing TNF-alpha, IL-1beta, IL-6 and the rest.

KPV interferes with that transit. Working in human bronchial epithelial cells, Land found that KPV enters the nucleus itself, stabilises the inhibitor protein, and physically competes with the p65 subunit of NF-kB at the importin binding site it needs to get through the nuclear pore (Land, 2012). The inflammatory signal arrives, but the messenger never reaches the nucleus.

The reason this works orally is a transporter called PepT1. KPV is a tripeptide, and PepT1 is the intestinal transporter that exists specifically to pull di- and tripeptides out of the gut lumen (Dalmasso et al., 2008). PepT1 is barely expressed in a healthy colon and gets upregulated during inflammatory bowel disease. So oral KPV is somewhat self targeting: it concentrates in the tissue that is already inflamed, and largely ignores tissue that is not.

At nanomolar concentrations, that was enough to shut down NF-kB activation and cytokine release in human intestinal epithelial cells and human T cells. The same pathway suppression has since been reproduced in human skin cells and a three dimensional skin model exposed to particulate pollution (Sung et al., 2025), which is a different tissue but the same mechanism.

Does KPV cause cancer or melanoma?

This is one of the most searched questions about the peptide, and the honest answer is better than the fear suggests.

The fear is inherited from Melanotan II and afamelanotide, which are genuine melanocortin-1 receptor agonists, drive melanogenesis, and carry real case report concerns about changing moles. People see alpha-MSH in KPV's lineage and assume the same risk applies.

It does not, for a specific and testable reason. In a competitive binding assay on mouse melanoma cells, KPV failed to displace radiolabelled alpha-MSH from its receptor (Lyson et al., 1994). It does not occupy the site that drives melanocyte proliferation. The pigmentary machinery is not being touched.

The functional evidence points the same way. When Kannengiesser gave KPV to mice with a non-functional melanocortin-1 receptor, it still worked, and still rescued them from death during severe colitis (Kannengiesser et al., 2008). The anti-inflammatory effect does not depend on the tanning receptor.

The one study that put KPV directly into a cancer model found the opposite of harm. In mice given a colitis-associated cancer protocol, oral KPV prevented tumour formation, and the protection vanished in animals lacking PepT1 (Viennois et al., 2016).

Two caveats, because I would rather give you the awkward findings than a clean story. A D-valine substituted version of KPV reduced the invasiveness of human uveal melanoma cells in a dish by around 45 to 50 percent (Cantón et al., 2003), and alpha-MSH family peptides including KPV protect melanoma cell lines from oxidative and cytokine stress (Haycock et al., 2000). Reduced invasiveness reads as good news. Protecting an existing malignant cell from stress is not unambiguously good news, even though it is nothing like evidence that KPV causes cancer. Both are cell culture findings in a dish, and neither has ever been followed up in a living human.

What the evidence actually supports

The colitis models

The core dataset is small, consistent, and entirely rodent.

Dalmasso gave mice KPV in their drinking water at 100 micromolar and ran two different colitis models, one chemical and one hapten driven. Colonic myeloperoxidase, a direct measure of neutrophil infiltration, dropped by roughly half in the first model and around 30 percent in the second, with matching falls in IL-1beta, IL-6, TNF-alpha and interferon gamma messenger RNA.

Kannengiesser's group replicated the effect independently, in a chemical colitis model and a T cell transfer model, reporting earlier recovery, better weight regain, and less histological infiltrate. A rectal hydrogel formulation produced the same pattern in rats (Sun et al., 2021).

Two independent groups, three or four models, consistent direction. For a preclinical package that is genuinely decent.

The 12,000-fold delivery problem

Here is the part that almost never makes it into the marketing.

Free KPV in solution works, but it is inefficient, because most of it never survives the trip to the colon intact. So the same research group built delivery systems. Alginate and chitosan nanoparticles engineered to release KPV at the colon achieved comparable efficacy at a concentration 12,000 times lower than free peptide (Laroui et al., 2010). A later hyaluronic acid functionalised version delivered 16 micrograms per kilogram per day orally and outperformed untargeted KPV nanoparticles (Xiao et al., 2017).

Read that again, because it cuts both ways. The efficient dose is tiny, which sounds encouraging. But it is tiny because of the nanoparticle. The delivery vehicle is doing most of the work. A plain capsule is a crude approximation of a purpose built colon targeted nanoparticle, and there is no data showing it reaches comparable concentrations in inflamed tissue.

What no human has ever shown

There is no completed human randomised trial of KPV. Not for colitis, not for skin, not for anything. A ClinicalTrials.gov search returns zero registered studies.

The only human tissue in the entire literature is cell lines and one cadaver skin permeation experiment, which found that passive diffusion of KPV across skin was undetectable without microneedles and iontophoresis (Pawar et al., 2017). There is no published half life for KPV by any route in any species. If a vendor quotes you one, ask where it came from.

I went looking specifically for the figure of 1.25 to 10 micrograms per kilogram intravenously that circulates on peptide sites as the research dose. It does not trace to any paper. It is not in the KPV literature and it is not in the alpha-MSH literature. Someone made it up and everyone copied it.

Why enhanced athletes get gut inflammation in the first place

Most KPV content is written for people with diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease. That is not who is buying it in this community. So it is worth being specific about what is damaging your gut, because the answer changes what you should do about it.

NSAIDs and the small bowel

This is the big one, and it is underrated because the damage is invisible on a standard blood panel.

In rheumatoid arthritis patients on more than a month of NSAID therapy, capsule endoscopy found small bowel lesions in 68 percent, 25 out of 37 (Tachecí et al., 2013). Just under half were mild, 11 percent moderate, and 8 percent severe, which the paper defines as more than twenty erosions or ulcers. The finding that should worry you more: no blood marker predicted who had it. Not haemoglobin, not white cell count, not albumin, not CRP.

That is a chronic high dose population rather than a lifter taking ibuprofen after a heavy session, so treat it as an upper bound. But the pattern of NSAID use in bodybuilding, daily and long running for joint pain, is closer to that population than most people would like to admit.

Training hard, hot, and fasted

During intense exercise blood is shunted away from the gut to working muscle. The enterocytes lining the intestine are sensitive to that, and when they are damaged they leak a protein called intestinal fatty acid binding protein, which is measurable in blood.

Repeated maximal sprints at 40 degrees raised it to 593 picograms per millilitre in well trained team sport athletes, with bacterial translocation markers rising alongside, while the same sprints in cool conditions produced no significant change at all (Wallett et al., 2022). By the fifth day of heat exposure the response had fallen to 454, which looks like acclimatisation rather than protection. Restricting fluid during a two hour run pushed the same marker higher than staying hydrated (Costa et al., 2019).

One trial actually pushes back on the common assumption that NSAIDs plus heat compounds acute gut injury: 600 mg of ibuprofen before an hour of running in heat did not measurably worsen gut damage markers against placebo, though it did raise IL-8 (Specht et al., 2025).

The high protein, low fibre problem

There is research done in actual bodybuilders here, which is rare enough to be worth leaning on.

Comparing bodybuilders, distance runners and sedentary controls, bodybuilders had the lowest abundance of beneficial short chain fatty acid producing bacteria of all three groups (Jang et al., 2019). A follow up found that probiotic supplementation did nothing unless fibre and protein intake were already in a normal range (Son et al., 2020).

The diet is the variable. Adding a capsule on top of 300 grams of protein and 12 grams of fibre does not fix it, and neither will KPV.

One thing I have to flag as a gap

You will see claims that oral 17-alpha-alkylated steroids damage the gut lining. I went looking for the evidence and there is essentially none in humans. The closest thing is androgen driven gut dysbiosis in a rodent model of polycystic ovary syndrome (Han et al., 2021), which is a different sex, a different species, and a different hormonal context.

It is a plausible mechanism. It is not a demonstrated one. Anyone citing it as established is overreaching, and I would rather tell you that than pad the section.

GLP-1 gut symptoms are not gut inflammation

Worth separating out, because people conflate these constantly.

Nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea on GLP-1 agonists are common and dose related. In the head to head trial of tirzepatide against semaglutide, nausea ran 17 to 22 percent and 18 percent respectively, diarrhoea 13 to 16 percent against 12 percent (Frías et al., 2021). Gastrointestinal events were the most common adverse effects in the retatrutide phase 2 trial too (Jastreboff et al., 2023).

None of that is inflammation. It is motility and appetite signalling, and by 20 weeks semaglutide at 2.4 mg showed no significant delay in gastric emptying at all (Friedrichsen et al., 2021). If your gut symptoms started when you started a GLP-1, an anti-inflammatory peptide is solving the wrong problem. Titrate slower instead. There is more on that in the GLP-1 bloodwork guide and the retatrutide monitoring guide.

Oral or subq, and why the answer is not what the vendors say

Every study showing an effect on gut inflammation used the oral or rectal route. Every single one.

That is not an accident of research convenience. It is the mechanism. KPV works in the gut because PepT1 carries it into inflamed intestinal tissue, and PepT1 lives in the intestinal lining. Take that route away and you have removed the reason the peptide concentrates where you want it.

No study has ever tested subcutaneous KPV for any inflammatory outcome. Not in mice, not in rats, not in a dish approximating it. Whether injected KPV reaches meaningful concentrations at the gut mucosa, or does anything useful systemically, is simply unstudied.

One paper is worth knowing about before someone throws it at you, because it is the closest thing to a counterexample. In 1991, Hiltz and colleagues gave mice a protected version of the same three residues by intraperitoneal injection and reduced ear swelling in a contact sensitivity model (Hiltz et al., 1991). So a systemically injected KPV analog did produce an anti-inflammatory effect, once, thirty five years ago, in a model that has nothing to do with the gut, using an acetylated and amidated variant rather than the plain tripeptide people buy.

That is a long way from evidence for injecting KPV for gut problems, but it is not nothing, and I would rather you heard it here.

So if you are buying KPV for gut inflammation and it arrives as a vial and a syringe, you are using the one route with no supporting evidence for that problem, to treat the one problem the oral route was designed around.

The dose gap nobody bridges

Run the standard allometric conversion on that mouse dose and you land near 1.3 micrograms per kilogram, which is about 115 to 120 mcg a day for a 90 kg lifter. That is the same order of magnitude as the 200 to 500 mcg being sold, which looks reassuring until you remember the research dose bought its efficiency from a nanoparticle that your capsule does not have.

The doses are not wildly wrong. The delivery is.

Morning or night, and how long to run it

People search this constantly, so here is the honest answer: no study addresses timing in any species, and no study addresses run length either.

Any vendor protocol telling you to dose at night for circadian reasons is inventing a rationale. If you run it, the 4 to 8 week window that shows up in community protocols is a convention, not a finding, and it is mostly chosen because that is roughly how long it takes bloodwork to show you whether anything moved.

KPV or BPC-157 for gut inflammation on cycle

These two get stacked constantly, usually without much thought about which problem each one solves. They are not interchangeable.

BPC-157 is a tissue repair peptide with a large rodent literature and no completed human trial for musculoskeletal or gut injury. It promotes angiogenesis and cell migration, which is why the cancer question around it is genuinely unresolved rather than reassuringly answered. We covered that in detail in the BPC-157 and TB-500 evidence review.

KPV does not repair anything. It suppresses an inflammatory transcription factor. Different job entirely.

A rough way to decide:

1. Are your symptoms driven by NSAIDs, training stress, or diet? Fix that first. Neither peptide outruns a daily diclofenac habit or 12 grams of fibre a day, and you will not be able to tell whether the peptide did anything while the cause is still running.
2. Is there an actual inflammatory signal, or just symptoms? Symptoms without a raised calprotectin are more likely functional than inflammatory. KPV targets inflammation. If there is no inflammation to target, it has nothing to do.
3. Is the problem the gut lining specifically, or systemic? KPV's whole advantage is gut local targeting via an oral route. Used systemically it loses its main selling point.
4. Are you planning to inject it? Then the evidence base you were relying on does not apply to what you are doing. That applies to KPV much more sharply than to BPC-157, which at least has subcutaneous rodent data.

On stacking order, the general framework in how to pick your first peptide applies: one variable at a time, long enough to read the result. Running KPV and BPC-157 together from day one means that if something improves, you will never know which one did it.

Which markers to track, and what a real response looks like

This is where most peptide content waves vaguely at bloodwork and moves on. It is worth doing properly, because the single most important fact about CRP is one almost nobody mentions.

CRP moves more than you think, on its own

The within-subject coefficient of variation for CRP is about 41 percent, and 44 percent for the high sensitivity assay (Gough et al., 2024). Compare that to creatinine at around 6 percent.

What that means in practice: if your CRP goes from 8 mg/L to 5 mg/L, nothing has happened. That is a 38 percent move and it sits inside normal biological noise. You have not responded to anything. You have taken two samples from the same noisy distribution.

This is the entire argument for trending rather than spot checking, and it is why the CDC and AHA recommend two measurements two weeks apart, averaged, before you classify anyone's risk at all. The strata themselves are simple: under 1.0 mg/L is low, 1.0 to 3.0 average, above 3.0 high.

The markers worth ordering

Two notes on that table. Ferritin's dual nature is a trap: during inflammation the cutoff for calling iron deficiency shifts from 30 to 100 micrograms per litre (Dignass et al., 2018), which is one more reason never to read ferritin alone. We went through that in depth in the iron paradox on TRT.

And calprotectin is a stool test, not a blood test. It is the one marker on the list that distinguishes gut inflammation from the general inflammatory noise of being a heavily training, possibly enhanced athlete, with pooled sensitivity of 85.8 percent and specificity of 91.7 percent for separating inflammatory bowel disease from irritable bowel syndrome (Dajti et al., 2023).

It has one confounder that matters enormously for this audience. Healthy volunteers given diclofenac at 50 mg three times daily for two weeks saw 27 percent exceed the upper limit of normal, with a median of 76 micrograms per gram and one reading as high as 958 (Rendek et al., 2016). If you test calprotectin while taking NSAIDs, you may be measuring your ibuprofen.

Skip IL-6 and TNF-alpha. They are expensive, the assays do not compare across labs, and there are no agreed cutoffs. They are research tools, not monitoring tools.

What if my CRP is 8 mg/L on cycle?

This is the scenario people actually arrive with, so let me work it properly.

Before you attribute 8 mg/L to gut inflammation, there are four things ahead of it in the queue.

Recent training. CRP rises after muscle damaging exercise, but only in people who mount a big creatine kinase response, and in those people it stays elevated from six hours out to day two (Isaacs et al., 2019). If you trained legs on Sunday and drew blood on Monday, you have measured your session. Draw at least five days clear of anything novel or heavy.

Infection or injury. Obvious, and routinely skipped. A cold three days ago will do this.

The cycle itself. Steroid using bodybuilders showed roughly double the CRP of natural bodybuilders and sedentary controls, around 1.2 mg/L against 0.6 (Grace and Davies, 2004). That is a small study from 2004, ten men in each bodybuilding group against eight sedentary controls, with no modern replication, so treat the magnitude as indicative. The direction is useful, the precision is not. Either way, 8 mg/L is far above anything an on cycle baseline shift explains.

Body fat. Adipose tissue produces CRP. If you are off season and carrying more than usual, that is part of the number.

Work through those and re-test. If CRP is still 8 mg/L five days clear of training, with no infection, then you have something worth investigating, and the next test is faecal calprotectin, because CRP cannot tell you where the inflammation is.

As for what a genuine response to anything would look like: given a 41 percent coefficient of variation, you want a sustained fall of roughly 40 percent or more, confirmed on a repeat draw. Eight down to under three, still under three a month later, is a signal. Eight down to five is a coin flip.

A sensible monitoring protocol

If you are going to run KPV for 8 weeks, this is the minimum that produces interpretable data.

Baseline hs-CRP, ESR and a full blood count before you start, drawn five to seven days clear of hard or novel training. Re-test at week 4 and week 8 under the same conditions, same lab, same time of day. Add faecal calprotectin only if CRP stays elevated after you have ruled out training, infection and NSAIDs, and stop the NSAIDs for at least a week before you collect it.

Change one variable. If you start KPV, a new training block and a diet change in the same week, you have run an experiment with no control and you will learn nothing from it.

Sourcing, and what you are actually buying

Since the July vote changed nothing legally, the supply situation is exactly what it was.

A small number of functional medicine and anti-aging clinics will dispense KPV through relationships with compounding pharmacies operating in a grey area. The overwhelming majority of KPV bought by athletes comes from research chemical vendors with no pharmacy involvement, no manufacturing oversight, and no purity guarantee. The advisory vote does not touch that channel at all. It was about what licensed pharmacies may do.

A 2026 sports medicine review naming KPV alongside the other peptides circulating in bodybuilding made the point directly: the evidence base, such as it is, comes from controlled research dosing, while the supply chain reaching athletes is unregulated and frequently mislabelled (Coutinho et al., 2026).

That is a compounding problem. You are taking a compound with no human data, through a route with no data at all, at a dose derived from nothing, from a vial whose contents nobody has verified. Each layer of uncertainty multiplies the one beneath it. If you want to reduce at least the last one, how to test for heavy metals in UGL steroids and peptides covers what third party testing can and cannot tell you.

Practical recommendations

If you take one thing from this, make it the route. KPV's entire evidence base is oral and rectal, and it rests on a transporter that only exists in the gut lining. Injecting it for gut inflammation discards the mechanism and keeps the risk.

Fix the causes before you reach for a peptide. NSAID use, training in heat while dehydrated, and a diet running 300 grams of protein against almost no fibre are all doing measurable damage, and all three are free to change. A peptide layered on top of an unchanged cause is untestable.

Get a baseline before you start anything. Not because KPV is dangerous, but because without one you have no way to distinguish a real response from the 40 percent that CRP moves on its own.

And be honest with yourself about the evidence tier. This is not BPC-157 with its large if flawed rodent literature and a decade of community reports. This is a compound with about six meaningful papers, all preclinical, mostly from one research group, where the most impressive result came from a nanoparticle nobody is selling you.

Key takeaways

• The July 2026 advisory committee vote recommended KPV for the compounding list by 8 to 6 with one abstention, overruling the FDA's own staff. It is non-binding, no final rule exists, and nothing about KPV's legal status has changed.
• KPV is the last three residues of alpha-MSH. It blocks NF-kB from entering the nucleus and rides the PepT1 transporter, which is upregulated exactly where the gut is inflamed.
• It is not Melanotan. KPV does not bind the melanocyte receptor alpha-MSH uses, it worked in mice with a non-functional melanocortin-1 receptor, and the one cancer model study found it prevented tumours.
• Every study showing an effect on gut inflammation used the oral or rectal route. Subcutaneous KPV has never been tested for any inflammatory outcome in any species.
• The efficient research dose came from a colon targeted nanoparticle achieving equivalent effects at 12,000 times lower concentration than free peptide. A plain capsule is not that.
• There are zero human trials, no published half life, and the widely quoted 1.25 to 10 mcg/kg intravenous dose does not trace to any paper.
• CRP varies more than 40 percent within the same person. A fall from 8 to 5 mg/L is noise. A sustained fall below 3, confirmed on repeat, is a signal.
• Faecal calprotectin is the only marker here that actually localises inflammation to the gut, and NSAIDs raise it enough to produce false positives.

---

References

1. Brzoska, T., Luger, T. A., Maaser, C., Abels, C., & Böhm, M. (2008). Alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone and related tripeptides: biochemistry, antiinflammatory and protective effects in vitro and in vivo, and future perspectives for the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Endocrine Reviews, 29(5), 581-602. PubMed
2. Cantón, I., Eves, P. C., Szabo, M., Vidal-Vanaclocha, F., Sisley, K., Rennie, I. G., Haycock, J. W., & MacNeil, S. (2003). Tumor necrosis factor alpha increases and alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone reduces uveal melanoma invasion through fibronectin. Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 121(3), 557-563. PubMed
3. Costa, R. J. S., Camões-Costa, V., Snipe, R. M. J., Dixon, D., Russo, I., & Huschtscha, Z. (2019). Impact of exercise-induced hypohydration on gastrointestinal integrity, function, symptoms, and systemic endotoxin and inflammatory profile. Journal of Applied Physiology, 126(5), 1281-1291. PubMed
4. Coutinho, L. F. D., de Oliveira Neves, L. F., & Camilo, R. P. (2026). A new era of doping? Use of peptide and peptide-analog drugs in recreational and professional sport and bodybuilding: A critical review. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 66(7), 880-885. PubMed
5. Dajti, E., Frazzoni, L., Iascone, V., Secco, M., Vestito, A., Fuccio, L., Eusebi, L. H., Fusaroli, P., Rizzello, F., Calabrese, C., Gionchetti, P., Bazzoli, F., & Zagari, R. M. (2023). Systematic review with meta-analysis: Diagnostic performance of faecal calprotectin in distinguishing inflammatory bowel disease from irritable bowel syndrome in adults. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 58(11-12), 1120-1131. PubMed
6. Dalmasso, G., Charrier-Hisamuddin, L., Nguyen, H. T. T., Yan, Y., Sitaraman, S., & Merlin, D. (2008). PepT1-mediated tripeptide KPV uptake reduces intestinal inflammation. Gastroenterology, 134(1), 166-178. PubMed
7. Dignass, A., Farrag, K., & Stein, J. (2018). Limitations of serum ferritin in diagnosing iron deficiency in inflammatory conditions. International Journal of Chronic Diseases, 2018, 9394060. PubMed
8. Frías, J. P., Davies, M. J., Rosenstock, J., Pérez Manghi, F. C., Fernández Landó, L., Bergman, B. K., Liu, B., Cui, X., & Brown, K. (2021). Tirzepatide versus semaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine, 385(6), 503-515. PubMed
9. Friedrichsen, M., Breitschaft, A., Tadayon, S., Wizert, A., & Skovgaard, D. (2021). The effect of semaglutide 2.4 mg once weekly on energy intake, appetite, control of eating, and gastric emptying in adults with obesity. Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism, 23(3), 754-762. PubMed
10. Gough, A., Sitch, A., Ferris, E., & Marshall, T. (2024). Within-subject variation of C-reactive protein and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 19(11), e0304961. PubMed
11. Grace, F. M., & Davies, B. (2004). Raised concentrations of C reactive protein in anabolic steroid using bodybuilders. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 38(1), 97-98. PubMed
12. Han, Q., Wang, J., Li, W., Chen, Z. J., & Du, Y. (2021). Androgen-induced gut dysbiosis disrupts glucolipid metabolism and endocrinal functions in polycystic ovary syndrome. Microbiome, 9(1), 101. PubMed
13. Haycock, J. W., Rowe, S. J., Cartledge, S., Wyatt, A., Ghanem, G., Morandini, R., Rennie, I. G., & MacNeil, S. (2000). Alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone reduces impact of proinflammatory cytokine and peroxide-generated oxidative stress on keratinocyte and melanoma cell lines. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 275(21), 15629-15636. PubMed
14. Hiltz, M. E., Catania, A., & Lipton, J. M. (1991). Anti-inflammatory activity of alpha-MSH(11-13) analogs: Influences of alteration in stereochemistry. Peptides, 12(4), 767-771. PubMed
15. Isaacs, A. W., Macaluso, F., Smith, C., & Myburgh, K. H. (2019). C-reactive protein is elevated only in high creatine kinase responders to muscle damaging exercise. Frontiers in Physiology, 10, 86. PubMed
16. Jang, L. G., Choi, G., Kim, S. W., Kim, B. Y., Lee, S., & Park, H. (2019). The combination of sport and sport-specific diet is associated with characteristics of gut microbiota: An observational study. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 16(1), 21. PubMed
17. Jastreboff, A. M., Kaplan, L. M., Frías, J. P., Wu, Q., Du, Y., Gurbuz, S., Coskun, T., Haupt, A., Milicevic, Z., & Hartman, M. L. (2023). Triple-hormone-receptor agonist retatrutide for obesity: A phase 2 trial. New England Journal of Medicine, 389(6), 514-526. PubMed
18. Kannengiesser, K., Maaser, C., Heidemann, J., Luegering, A., Ross, M., Brzoska, T., Böhm, M., Luger, T. A., Domschke, W., & Kucharzik, T. (2008). Melanocortin-derived tripeptide KPV has anti-inflammatory potential in murine models of inflammatory bowel disease. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, 14(3), 324-331. PubMed
19. Land, S. C. (2012). Inhibition of cellular and systemic inflammation cues in human bronchial epithelial cells by melanocortin-related peptides: mechanism of KPV action and a role for MC3R agonists. International Journal of Physiology, Pathophysiology and Pharmacology, 4(2), 59-73. PubMed
20. Laroui, H., Dalmasso, G., Nguyen, H. T., Yan, Y., Sitaraman, S. V., & Merlin, D. (2010). Drug-loaded nanoparticles targeted to the colon with polysaccharide hydrogel reduce colitis in a mouse model. Gastroenterology, 138(3), 843-853. PubMed
21. Lyson, K., Ceriani, G., Takashima, A., Catania, A., & Lipton, J. M. (1994). Binding of anti-inflammatory alpha-melanocyte-stimulating-hormone peptides and proinflammatory cytokines to receptors on melanoma cells. Neuroimmunomodulation, 1(2), 121-126. PubMed
22. Pawar, K., Kolli, C. S., Rangari, V. K., & Babu, R. J. (2017). Transdermal iontophoretic delivery of lysine-proline-valine (KPV) peptide across microporated human skin. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 106(7), 1814-1820. PubMed
23. Rendek, Z., Falk, M., & Grodzinsky, E. (2016). Effect of oral diclofenac intake on faecal calprotectin. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 51(1), 28-32. PubMed
24. Son, J., Jang, L. G., Kim, B. Y., Lee, S., & Park, H. (2020). The effect of athletes' probiotic intake may depend on protein and dietary fiber intake. Nutrients, 12(10), 2947. PubMed
25. Specht, J. W., Bailly, A. R., Garcia, S., Klepacz, S., Andrade De Oliveira, S., Lucero, D., McKenna, Z. J., Schlader, Z. J., & Amorim, F. T. (2025). Effect of ibuprofen on markers of acute kidney injury, intestinal injury, and endotoxemia after running in the heat. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 57(6), 1092-1102. PubMed
26. Sun, J., Xue, P., Liu, J., Huang, L., Lin, G., Ran, K., Yang, J., Lu, C., Zhao, Y. Z., & Xu, H. L. (2021). Self-cross-linked hydrogel of cysteamine-grafted gamma-polyglutamic acid stabilized tripeptide KPV for alleviating TNBS-induced ulcerative colitis in rats. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering, 7(10), 4859-4869. PubMed
27. Sung, J., Ju, S. Y., Park, S., Jung, W. K., Je, J. Y., & Lee, S. J. (2025). Lysine-proline-valine peptide mitigates fine dust-induced keratinocyte apoptosis and inflammation by regulating oxidative stress and modulating the MAPK/NF-kB pathway. Tissue and Cell, 95, 102837. PubMed
28. Tachecí, I., Bradna, P., Douda, T., Baštecká, D., Kopáčová, M., Rejchrt, S., & Bureš, J. (2013). NSAID-induced enteropathy in rheumatoid arthritis patients with chronic occult gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective capsule endoscopy study. Gastroenterology Research and Practice, 2013, 268382. PubMed
29. Viennois, E., Ingersoll, S. A., Ayyadurai, S., Zhao, Y., Wang, L., Zhang, M., Han, M. K., Garg, P., Xiao, B., & Merlin, D. (2016). Critical role of PepT1 in promoting colitis-associated cancer and therapeutic benefits of the anti-inflammatory PepT1-mediated tripeptide KPV in a murine model. Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2(3), 340-357. PubMed
30. Wallett, A., McKune, A., Pyne, D., Bishop, D., Girard, O., Saunders, P., & Périard, J. (2022). Repeated-sprint exercise in the heat increases indirect markers of gastrointestinal damage in well-trained team-sport athletes. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, 32(3), 153-162. PubMed
31. Wang, Q., Jiang, Y., Jin, F., Gan, L., Li, R., Sun, D., Zhang, M., Pei, Z., Zhang, J., Ye, J., & Wang, T. (2025). Reference range of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in healthy individuals and its predictive value for post-trauma nosocomial infections. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, 15, 1529532. PubMed
32. Xiao, B., Xu, Z., Viennois, E., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Z., Zhang, M., Han, M. K., Kang, Y., & Merlin, D. (2017). Orally targeted delivery of tripeptide KPV via hyaluronic acid-functionalized nanoparticles efficiently alleviates ulcerative colitis. Molecular Therapy, 25(7), 1628-1640. PubMed