Human study PLS-00227
PCO-02 - Safety and Pharmacokinetics Trial
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.
- PCO-02 - Safety and Pharmacokinetics Trialregistry entry · NCT02637284 (UNKNOWN, no results posted, planned enrollment 42)
Design and participants
- Design
- Other design
- Population
- Healthy volunteers
- Conditions
- Healthy Volunteers
- Planned enrollment (registry)
- 42
- Enrolled
- Not reported
- 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.
- PCO-02 (BPC-157, Bepecin) (intervention) · bpc-157 · Registry lists the interventions 'PCO-02, BPC-157' and 'Bepecin'. · Not reported assigned
- PCO-03 (intervention) · bpc-157 (unclear) · Registry lists PCO-03 as an intervention. Its relation to BPC-157 is not described in the record. · Not reported assigned
- Placebo (comparator) · Placebo listed as an intervention in the registry. · placebo · Not reported assigned
What the authors reported
As stated in the sources. This is the authors’ account, not Peptide Library’s assessment.
Safety
unclear outcome · safety
- No results reported.
Pharmacokinetics
unclear outcome · surrogate
- No results reported.
Adverse events
None reported. That is not evidence of safety.
Monitoring: Safety is named as an aim in the study title. No monitoring procedures are described in the record.
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
- selective reporting: The registry shows has_results false and status unknown, so no outcome data are available for any arm.
- inappropriate population: Enrolled healthy volunteers, not people with knee pain, tendon, muscle or gastrointestinal conditions.
- inadequate randomization: The record does not state whether allocation to PCO-02, PCO-03 or placebo was randomized.
- small or imprecise: Planned enrollment is only 42 (estimated), split across several interventions, typical of a phase 1 study.
- other: The nature of PCO-03 and its relation to BPC-157 are not described in the registry record.
No risk-of-bias assessment has been published for this study’s results.
Claims this study informs
- Reduces knee pain: not eligible (wrong population) for “Knee pain intensity”
- Supports tendon injury recovery: not eligible (wrong population) for “Function and return to activity”
- Improves muscle injury recovery: not eligible (wrong population) for “Time to return to activity”
- Improves gastrointestinal conditions: not eligible (wrong population) for “Clinical response or remission”
- Is safe for human administration: not eligible (insufficient data) for “Adverse events, serious adverse events and discontinuations”
Where each value comes from
- arms: NCT NCT02637284, registry (interventions) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
- design: NCT NCT02637284, registry (phases and study_type) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
- limitations: NCT NCT02637284, registry (status and has_results) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
- outcomes: NCT NCT02637284, title (study title) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
- participants: NCT NCT02637284, registry (enrollment and enrollment_type) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person)
- population: NCT NCT02637284, registry (conditions) · 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).