Peptide Library

Human study PLS-00054

Circulating mitochondrial biomarkers in acute coronary syndrome.

Case-control study · 38 participants enrolled · not included in the assessments (other)

Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.

Only the abstract was available. Essential methods may be missing, which limits what can be judged.

Reports of this study

Every publication, registration and abstract describing this one study. Participants are counted once.

  • Circulating mitochondrial biomarkers in acute coronary syndrome.primary · Frontiers in medicine · 2025-05-15 · PMID 40443515 · DOI

Design and participants

Design
Case-control study
Population
Patients with acute coronary syndrome (8 women, 10 men) and controls (8 women, 12 men)
Conditions
Acute coronary syndrome
Planned enrollment (registry)
Not reported
Enrolled
38
Randomized
Not reported
Completed follow-up
Not reported

Intervention and comparator

What each group received. Related peptides, analogs and combinations are never treated as the compound itself.

    What the authors reported

    As stated in the sources. This is the authors’ account, not Peptide Library’s assessment.

    Adverse events

    None reported. That is not evidence of safety, and how safety was monitored isn’t described.

    The authors concluded (paraphrased): Mitochondrial markers MOTS-c and PGC-1α are altered in ACS patients, with no sex differences. The authors see this as an initial step toward personalized ACS management and say further studies are needed.

    Peptide Library’s assessment

    An automated assessment, made by AI separately from the authors’ conclusions and not reviewed by a person. How risk of bias is assessed.

    Limitations

    • other: MOTS-c was not administered; only endogenous plasma levels were measured, so the study gives no evidence about MOTS-c as an intervention.
    • small or imprecise: Only 18 ACS patients and 20 controls were included, which limits precision.
    • confounding: The abstract describes no adjustment for differences between ACS patients and controls.
    • abstract only: Only the abstract is available; methods, numbers and statistics are not reported.
    • inappropriate endpoint: Outcomes are plasma biomarker levels and correlations, not clinical outcomes.

    No risk-of-bias assessment has been published for this study’s results.

    Claims this study informs

    Where each value comes from

    • arms: PMID 40443515, abstract (Methods, sentences 1-3) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • author_conclusion: PMID 40443515, abstract (Conclusion, sentences 1-3) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • design: PMID 40443515, abstract (Methods, sentence 1) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • limitations: PMID 40443515, abstract (Methods and Conclusion) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • outcomes: PMID 40443515, abstract (Methods, sentence 3) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • participants: PMID 40443515, abstract (Methods, sentence 1) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • population: PMID 40443515, abstract (Methods, sentence 1) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • results: PMID 40443515, abstract (Results, sentences 1-3) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only

    • Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.

    These assessments describe published research. Records marked automated were produced by AI under the published methodology and have not been reviewed by a person; they can contain errors. None of this is medical advice, not a statement about any product’s safety for human use, and not a regulatory approval. Peptide Library’s vendor and partner relationships play no part in them (editorial independence).