The Compound Evidence Institute publishes graded assessments of compounds, trials, analytical methods and supply documentation. It sells nothing, prescribes nothing and recommends nothing. Every surface is a dated document with a stated certainty, and where the Institute extrapolates rather than reports, the document says so at the point where it does it.
The Institute ratifies documents quarterly. 554 documents carry 2026 Q3 as the cycle in which their current version was ratified. 11 public comment periods are open.
Identification, pharmacology, graded clinical evidence, safety, regulatory status, analytical characterisation, supply considerations and a numbered record of evidence gaps. Eight parts per compound with a per-indication evidence extract for each assessed outcome.
Structured abstracts with a field-by-field provenance table distinguishing extracted figures from Institute reconstructions, a design and population section, results, a domain-by-domain certainty assessment and the documents that cite each record.
Registered PICO frames, reproduced searches, included and excluded studies with reasons, summary-of-findings tables with a certainty rating per outcome, and an amendment log recording every change made after registration.
Scope, principle, apparatus, procedure, system suitability and acceptance criteria, and a worked example. Each states the performance a procedure must achieve rather than prescribing a fixed procedure.
Assessment of published documentation against a six-criterion weighted rubric with anchored scales. The Institute performs no independent testing and every dossier says so on its face.
One anchor outcome per indication so that estimates for different compounds are reported on a common measure, with the certainty of the evidence for every compound assessed in it.
Record of documents ratified in the 2026 Q3 assessment cycle.
In the population defined for inflammatory bowel disease and mucosal barrier disorders, what is the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation with…
In the population defined for obesity and overweight in adults, what is the effect of Survodutide compared with the comparator used in its contributing trials on the…
How large is the discrepancy between labelled peptide mass and delivered peptide mass when counter-ion and water content are not reported?
What do published analytical surveys report about the identity, purity and content of peptides obtained from unregulated suppliers?
In the population defined for growth hormone deficiency and growth-hormone secretagogue pharmacology, what is the effect of Gonadorelin compared with the comparator used…
Peptides, SARMs, injectable oils and raw materials.
In the population defined for immune modulation and adjunctive immunotherapy, is the effect of Thymosin alpha-1 maintained across the full duration of the contributing…
High certainty evidence indicates that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduce body weight substantially more than placebo over 56 to 104 weeks, with a placebo-subtracted effect that differs by agent and by dose across roughly a threefold range. The certainty is high for the existence and…
Moderate certainty evidence indicates that multi-receptor agonists produce a larger mean weight reduction than single glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. One head-to-head trial supports the comparison directly for tirzepatide against semaglutide; the remainder of the network is indirect. The…
High certainty evidence indicates that the class as a whole reduces major adverse cardiovascular events relative to placebo in the enrolled populations. The Institute nonetheless declines to describe the effect as a class effect: the neutral result of the lixisenatide trial and the borderline…
Moderate certainty evidence from two randomised withdrawal trials indicates that a substantial proportion of the weight lost during treatment is regained after withdrawal, and that continued treatment is required to maintain the effect. The Institute regards this as the single most…
High certainty evidence indicates that nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and constipation are substantially more frequent with incretin receptor agonists than with placebo, that they are dose- and titration-rate-dependent, and that they attenuate with continued exposure in most but not all participants…
Moderate certainty evidence indicates that oral presentations can achieve efficacy in the range of injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists when sufficient doses are achieved, and that the bioavailability constraint of oral peptide delivery is overcome by dose escalation rather than by…
Consultation on the draft certainty index, a cross-cutting finding aid that lists every assessed outcome in the document set by its certainty rating. The index makes it possible to see, in one place, how much of the Institute's output…
Consultation on the draft of this intervention review, which registers the question: What randomised evidence supports mitochondria-targeted peptides in primary mitochondrial disease and in age-related functional decline?
Consultation on the draft monograph for SS-31 (elamipretide), which the assessment committee released for public comment before ratification. The draft grades the compound's principal assessed outcome at moderate certainty and states the…
Consultation on the draft of CEI-MS-13, which specifies the performance a determination must achieve for method validation and states what the resulting figure does not establish. The draft states performance rather than prescribing a…
Concentration, injection volume, syringe units and doses per vial, with the graduation-error range stated.
The arithmetic of delivered peptide mass, and whether a certificate permits a mass balance to be closed.
Score a certificate against the Institute’s minimum data standard, critical fields weighted separately.
Illustrative equivalence anchored on placebo-subtracted weight change, refusing to extrapolate past each programme ceiling.