Evidence synthesis · §4
Human evidence for BPC-157 — summary of findings
Outcome-by-outcome summary with effect, certainty and the reason for each downgrade.
§4Summary of findings
§4.1Summary of findings
Table 7. Summary of findings for Human evidence for BPC-157.
| Outcome | Participants (studies) | Effect as reported | Certainty | Reason for downgrade |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time to return to activityThe outcome the Institute designates as anchor for this indication. | — (1) | The Institute conducted a systematic search for randomised controlled trials of BPC-157 in any human population and indication and identified no… | Very low | risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision |
| Discontinuation for adverse eventsReported as a summary-of-findings row rather than in a tolerability annex, following a public submission. | — (1) | Reported per contributing trial; see the included-studies table | Very low | inconsistency, publication bias |
| Serious adverse eventsEvent counts are low; the estimate is imprecise by construction. | — (1) | Reported per contributing trial; see the included-studies table | Very low | inconsistency, indirectness, publication bias |
| Any adverse eventAscertained by spontaneous report in the contributing trials. | — (1) | Reported per contributing trial; see the included-studies table | Very low | risk of bias, inconsistency |
| Pain on loadingA secondary outcome for this indication. Its hierarchical position within each contributing trial is recorded on that trial's abstract where the Institute holds it. | — (1) | Reported as a secondary outcome in a subset of contributing trials | Very low | inconsistency, imprecision |
| Tendon thickness and structure on ultrasoundA secondary outcome for this indication. Its hierarchical position within each contributing trial is recorded on that trial's abstract where the Institute holds it. | — (1) | Reported as a secondary outcome in a subset of contributing trials | Very low | inconsistency, imprecision, publication bias |
| Certainty ratings describe confidence in the effect estimate for the stated outcome. They are not recommendations and do not transfer between outcomes. | ||||
§4.2Certainty assessment for the anchor outcome
Table 8. Reasoning recorded against each certainty domain for the anchor outcome.
| Domain | Rating | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Risk of bias | Serious | The primary endpoint is patient-reported in a setting where blinding cannot be maintained. |
| Inconsistency | Serious | Estimates vary in magnitude across contributing trials beyond what chance would produce. |
| Indirectness | No concern | No serious concern identified in this domain. |
| Imprecision | Serious | A single small trial contributes the whole estimate. |
| Publication bias | No concern | No serious concern identified in this domain. |
| Overall: Very low certainty. The Institute has very little confidence in the effect estimate. The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate. In this series a very low rating most often reflects an absence of controlled human evidence rather than conflicting evidence. | ||
Compound Evidence Institute · CEI-ES-014/4 · https://compoundevidence.com/syntheses/bpc-157-human-evidence/summary-of-findings/ · retrieved 30 July 2026