We did not identify established human drug trials for Dihexa. Its evidence is preclinical, and an important foundational paper has a research-integrity warning, which makes confident claims even less appropriate.
Still uncertain: Human benefit, dosing, how the body handles it, safety, cognitive enhancement, long-term effects or reliability of retracted foundational mechanism claims.
By confirming your subscription, you agree to receive occasional WhichPeps Evidence Updates. Kit processes the signup and email delivery for WhichPeps. Privacy. Unsubscribe anytime.
What does the evidence mean in simple terms? table
What is it?
Angiotensin-IV-derived peptidomimetic small molecule
Entity type
Small molecule
Research focus
Experimental cognition, synaptogenesis, neurodegeneration research
Human evidence
FDA states it has not identified human exposure data for drug products containing dihexa acetate by any route.
Regulatory status
Not an approved medicine. FDA lists dihexa acetate among bulk substances with significant safety-information gaps; a UNII/GSRS identity record does not imply approval.
Main limitations
Human efficacy, dosing, PK, safety, cognitive enhancement, long-term effects or reliability of retracted foundational mechanism claims.
Safety
Human safety is unknown; foundational mechanism literature also includes a formal retraction.
Evidence reviewed
2026-09-18
i
FDA states it has not identified human exposure data for drug products containing dihexa acetate by any route.
Outcome-level evidence
Evidence is not one score.
Each record below answers a narrower question about an outcome, population or context. Evidence status and the study finding are shown separately so strong evidence is not mistaken for a positive effect.
The journal retracted the 2014 paper after a Washington State University investigation found falsified and/or fabricated data in figures and related erratum data.
Human safety is unknown; foundational mechanism literature also includes a formal retraction.
Human safety is essentially uncharacterised; FDA lacks important safety information, and the evidence base also includes a formal retraction affecting foundational mechanistic claims.
Technical details
Mechanism / biologyHistorically proposed HGF/c-Met and synaptogenesis mechanisms require a prominent integrity warning because the foundational 2014 paper supporting key HGF-binding/c-Met/procognitive claims was formally retracted in 2025 after falsified/fabricated data were identified.
Route / formulation boundaryNo route has an established human therapeutic safety/dose framework for dihexa itself.
Identity / data-quality noteFoundational 2014 HGF/c-Met Dihexa paper retracted in 2025; do not use it as unqualified supporting evidence.
Study / label regimen evidenceNo verified human dihexa dosing regimen identified. No human drug-exposure dosing record for dihexa itself was identified; internet dosing protocols should not be presented as evidence.
WhichPeps does not rely on a single headline study when the evidence base is broader. Primary research, registries, regulators and supporting records are kept distinct.
2structured study records
3outcome records
6linked source records
How to read these counts: they show evidence coverage, not evidence strength. One large, well-designed study can be more informative than several weak or indirect records.
Show supporting and discovery sources
Study pages above contain the records used for public evidence summaries. The links below include supporting, regulatory and literature-discovery sources; a registry or search result is not treated as proof of benefit.
Evidence rule: WhichPeps keeps human, animal, laboratory, regulatory and product/formulation evidence distinct. Common names help people find the page; they do not change the underlying scientific identity.
