Human study PLS-00212

Study of Thymosin Beta 4 in Patients With Venous Stasis Ulcers

Other design · 72 participants enrolled

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.

Reports of this study

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

Study of Thymosin Beta 4 in Patients With Venous Stasis Ulcersregistry entry · NCT00832091 (COMPLETED, results posted, planned enrollment 72)

Design and participants

Design: Other design
Population: Patients with venous stasis ulcers
Conditions: Venous Stasis Ulcers
Planned enrollment (registry): 72
Enrolled: 72
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.

Thymosin beta 4 (RGN-137 topical gel) (intervention) · thymosin-beta-4 (formulation) · Thymosin beta 4 as RGN-137 topical gel · topical · Not reported assigned
Placebo (comparator) · Placebo · placebo · Not reported assigned

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.

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: The record contains only registry fields. No outcome measures, results, adverse event data or publication are provided, even though the registry flags that results exist.
inadequate randomization: The record lists a placebo but does not state the allocation method or masking, so randomization and blinding cannot be confirmed.
selective reporting: No registered outcomes or results appear in the record, so complete reporting cannot be checked against prespecified endpoints.

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

Claims this study informs

Improves dry eye signs and symptoms: not eligible (wrong population) for “Ocular discomfort and corneal staining”
Is safe for human administration: not eligible (insufficient data) for “Adverse events, serious adverse events and discontinuations”

Where each value comes from

arms: NCT NCT00832091, registry (interventions field) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
design: NCT NCT00832091, registry (phases, study_type and interventions fields) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
limitations: NCT NCT00832091, registry (has_results field and absence of outcome fields) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
participants: NCT NCT00832091, registry (enrollment and enrollment_type fields) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
population: NCT NCT00832091, registry (conditions field) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)

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).