Peptide Library

Human study PLS-00128

Thymosin alpha 1 and thymosin beta 4 in serum: comparison of normal, cord, homosexual and AIDS serum.

Cross-sectional study · Not reported participants enrolled · not included in the assessments (other)

Version 1 · published November 8, 2026 · evidence through November 8, 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.

  • Thymosin alpha 1 and thymosin beta 4 in serum: comparison of normal, cord, homosexual and AIDS serum.primary · International journal of immunopharmacology · 1986-01-01 · PMID 3781707 · DOI

Design and participants

Design
Cross-sectional study
Population
Serum donors: normal adult males and females, neonates (cord blood), homosexual men, people with AIDS, and people with AIDS-related immune dysfunction.
Conditions
Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, AIDS-related immune dysfunction
Planned enrollment (registry)
Not reported
Enrolled
Not reported
Randomized
Not reported
Completed follow-up
Not reported
Funding
The PubMed publication types list U.S. Government (P.H.S.) and non-U.S. Government research support. No further details are given.
Authors’ conflicts
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.

    Monitoring: Not applicable; no compound was administered.

    The authors concluded (paraphrased): Serum levels of thymosin alpha 1 and beta 4 appear to be modulated separately. Both peptides may help define an individual's risk of developing AIDS.

    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: Endogenous serum peptide levels were measured; thymosin beta 4 was not administered, so no treatment effect can be assessed.
    • abstract only: Only the abstract is available; sample sizes, methods and analysis details are not reported.
    • inappropriate endpoint: The only outcomes are serum radioimmunoassay levels, a biomarker with no patient-important or safety outcomes.
    • no control group: The groups are compared descriptively, and no intervention was assigned or compared.

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

    Claims this study informs

    Where each value comes from

    • author_conclusion: PMID 3781707, abstract (final sentence) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • design: PMID 3781707, abstract (sentence 3) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • funding: PMID 3781707, title (publication types) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • outcomes: PMID 3781707, abstract (sentences 3-7) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • population: PMID 3781707, abstract (sentence 7) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only

    • Version 1 · published November 8, 2026 · evidence through November 8, 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).