CJC-1295 side effects by evidence tier: the 2006 human trials of the DAC form, why sustained GH and IGF-1 elevation is the key DAC vs no-DAC difference, the gaps, and Canadian and WADA status.
CJC-1295 is a tetrasubstituted analogue of the first 29 amino acids of growth hormone-releasing hormone, sold in two forms: with a Drug Affinity Complex that binds it to serum albumin for about a week, and without, where the half-life is roughly thirty minutes. Almost every safety statement about CJC-1295 comes from human studies of the DAC form, and the safety-relevant difference between the two forms is sustained versus pulsed exposure. This page is a research reference that separates controlled human data from inference and self-report, and keeps the two forms apart. It is not advice.
The CJC-1295 profile is the reference entry; the research overview covers mechanism, the DAC vs no-DAC article the chemistry, and the dosage notes how the trials administered it.
Two ConjuChem-sponsored studies in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (2006) are the whole controlled human record.
Teichman and colleagues gave healthy adults single subcutaneous doses of 30 or 60 µg/kg, and repeated doses of 30 or 60 µg/kg weekly or 30 µg/kg fortnightly. Mean GH rose two- to ten-fold for six days or more and IGF-1 1.5- to three-fold for nine to eleven days, with a half-life of 5.8 to 8.1 days. The compound was described as generally well tolerated. The adverse events reported were those expected from a GHRH analogue: injection-site reactions, transient flushing, headache and, at the higher doses, fluid retention and joint discomfort consistent with GH elevation. IGF-1 rose into or above the upper reference range in some participants at the higher doses, which anchors the concerns below.
Ionescu and Frohman gave single doses of 60 or 90 µg/kg with frequent blood sampling and found that GH secretion under continuous stimulation still came in pulses, with raised trough levels, rather than as a flat plateau. That pulsatile release underpins the claim that a GHRH analogue is more physiological than injected GH; it says nothing by itself about tolerability.
Both studies were small, weeks long, in healthy adults; neither was powered to detect an uncommon event.
The Drug Affinity Complex is a maleimidopropionyl group on a thirtieth lysine that binds covalently to the free cysteine on circulating albumin within minutes of injection; from then on the peptide persists as long as albumin does. Two safety consequences follow, and neither applies to the no-DAC form.
The first is irreversibility. If an adverse effect occurs after a DAC dose, the compound cannot be withdrawn; GH and IGF-1 elevation runs its course over a week or more. No-DAC CJC-1295, with its thirty-minute half-life, clears within hours.
The second is the character of the exposure. No-DAC produces a discrete GH pulse that subsides within a couple of hours and lets the somatostatin and IGF-1 feedback loops reset between doses. DAC produces a raised GH baseline and a sustained IGF-1 elevation for nine to eleven days per dose. Sustained IGF-1 is exactly the exposure behind the theoretical concerns attached to growth hormone: reduced insulin sensitivity, and the possibility that elevated IGF-1 could promote an existing tumour. Neither was demonstrated in the 2006 trials, and neither could have been in trials of that size and duration.
ConjuChem took the DAC form into Phase 2 for HIV-associated lipodystrophy, and a participant death was reported during that programme. The public record does not attribute it to the drug, the population was medically complex, and the results were never fully published; but development did not resume and no adequately powered safety dataset was ever produced. The same indication was later taken to approval by tesamorelin, the only GHRH analogue with a monograph-grade adverse-reaction table.
Community sources describe injection-site welts, flushing, headache, water retention, tingling in the hands and drowsiness after evening doses — uncontrolled, unblinded self-reports with no denominator, which cannot establish incidence or causation.
Two product-level issues are specific to CJC-1295. The first is identity: the two forms differ in mass by only about 280 Da and are sold under one name, so the mass-spectrometry line on the certificate of analysis is the only way to confirm which one a vial contains — reading a peptide certificate of analysis explains how, and lab testing and COAs describes what each lot is tested for. The second is chemistry: the DAC form's maleimide reacts with any free thiol, so it is incompatible with thiol-containing compounds such as glutathione in the same syringe, and it slowly hydrolyses in solution. GHRH analogues are also prone to oxidation and aggregation; the cold-chain and shelf-life guide covers storage. Reactions in unregulated use can trace to impurities, endotoxin or degradation rather than the molecule.
CJC-1295 has no Health Canada market authorisation and no DIN in either form; the no-DAC and DAC vials sold here are supplied for laboratory research only. In September 2023 the U.S. FDA placed CJC-1295 in category 2 of its section 503A bulk-substance evaluation, citing the absence of adequate human safety data. The World Anti-Doping Agency lists GHRH and its analogues under S2 and names CJC-1295 explicitly; it is prohibited for tested athletes at all times.
What side effects did the CJC-1295 trials report? The two 2006 human studies of the DAC form described injection-site reactions, transient flushing, headache and, at higher doses, fluid retention and joint discomfort, with IGF-1 above the reference range in some participants. It was described as generally well tolerated over the weeks studied.
Is CJC-1295 with DAC or without DAC the safer form? Untested, but the structural difference is clear. DAC binds albumin, sustains GH and IGF-1 elevation for a week or more per dose and cannot be withdrawn; no-DAC clears within hours. The only human safety data is for DAC; no-DAC has none.
Did anyone die in the CJC-1295 trials? A participant death was reported during ConjuChem's Phase 2 programme in HIV lipodystrophy. It was not publicly attributed to the drug; the programme ended without a published safety dataset.
Is the IGF-1 and cancer concern established? No, and neither is its absence. IGF-1 is mitogenic and the DAC form raises it for nine to eleven days per dose. No trial of CJC-1295 has been large or long enough to test the question.
Is CJC-1295 prohibited in sport? Yes. WADA names CJC-1295 under S2, GHRH and its analogues, prohibited at all times.
Is this medical advice? No. This page summarises published research for laboratory reference. CJC-1295 is sold here as research-grade material, not for human or veterinary use, and nothing above is a safety assurance or a dosing recommendation. Health decisions belong with a qualified physician.
