Skip to content

Shop
Scholar
Lab Results
Learn
Vote
Forum
About

Search Kodiac

Sign in Sign up Account

Category: Uncategorized

Resveratrol

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 60 / 100

Resveratrol is a natural compound found in red wine, grape skins, and Japanese knotweed. It activates sirtuins and other longevity-associated pathways and has been the subject of intense longevity research. Oral bioavailability is poor, limiting clinical efficacy. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundOverhyped vs evidence

30/100

Well-studied polyphenol undermined by poor bioavailability and a partially-discredited SIRT1 narrative

Look, resveratrol had its moment. David Sinclair’s 2003 Cell paper on SIRT1 activation was genuinely exciting, and the follow-up 2006 Nature paper showing lifespan extension in obese mice turned this grape polyphenol into one of the most-hyped compounds in aging biology. The problem is that most of that story has since unraveled in ways that matter for bench work.

The SIRT1 activation mechanism (the whole foundation of the resveratrol narrative) turned out to be substrate-dependent. The original assay used an artificial fluorophore-tagged substrate, and when Pfizer’s group and others replicated with native peptide substrates, the activation was dramatically reduced or absent. SIRT1 activation is real in some substrate contexts but the claim that resveratrol is a general SIRT1 activator doesn’t hold up. That’s not a minor quibble; it’s the central claim. The compound still hits AMPK and NF-kB, and the antioxidant activity is real, but none of those targets are unique to resveratrol and none of them explain the original hype.

Bioavailability is the other killer. Oral resveratrol undergoes rapid phase-2 conjugation and first-pass metabolism, leaving plasma concentrations that are typically one to ten percent of what drives effects in cell culture. The human dose to hit effective tissue concentrations either isn’t achievable or requires doses that create their own tolerability issues. This isn’t new information; it’s been known since the early 2010s. It means that most clinical trials were essentially testing whether resveratrol works at sub-therapeutic concentrations. The answer, unsurprisingly, has been mostly no.

The clinical trial record reinforces this. The CALERIE-adjacent work, the trials in diabetic and metabolic patients, the cardiovascular studies: effect sizes are modest at best, null at worst. Resveratrol supplementation in otherwise healthy populations shows very little. There are some positive signals in specific subpopulations (older adults, high-fat-diet stress conditions) but nothing close to what the preclinical story implied, and the lifespan extension in mice failed to replicate in normally-fed animals.

What we don’t like about resveratrol as a research target right now: the field has genuinely moved on. If you’re interested in the sirtuin axis, NMN and NR have better pharmacokinetics and a more credible human signal. If you want a stilbenoid probe, pterostilbene has improved bioavailability and a tighter mechanistic story. If you want a polyphenol tool for NF-kB or antioxidant pathway work, there are cleaner options. Resveratrol still appears in bench protocols as a positive control for antioxidant assays and as a historical comparator in aging studies, and thats a legitimate use case. But it’s not where you’d anchor a research program in 2025. The hype-to-evidence ratio here is one of the worst in the longevity compound space, and that’s saying something.

Novelty

22

Mechanism promise

30

In-category differentiation

20

Evidence quality

52

Translational signal

22

Research bench value

40

Rationale Resveratrol scores low on novelty and differentiation because the flagship SIRT1 activation story is now known to be substrate-artifact-dependent, and the compound has been largely superseded by NMN/NR on the sirtuin axis and pterostilbene in the stilbenoid space; a large clinical trial base exists but mostly returns null results at achievable plasma concentrations, killing the translational score.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Stilbenoid polyphenol / sirtuin modulator

A trans-stilbenoid polyphenol from grapes and other plants, characterized by SIRT1 activation and pleiotropic anti-aging effects with disputed clinical efficacy.

Abstract

Resveratrol (trans-3,4′,5-trihydroxystilbene; CAS 501-36-0; molecular formula C14H12O3; molecular weight 228.25) is a stilbenoid polyphenol present in grapes, peanuts, berries, and several other plants. The compound has been extensively studied for anti-aging applications since David Sinclair’s group at Harvard demonstrated SIRT1 activation in 2003. Mechanism includes SIRT1 sirtuin activation (allosteric activator at certain peptide substrates; the activity is substrate-dependent), AMPK activation, anti-inflammatory effects through NF-kB inhibition, and direct antioxidant activity. Resveratrol extends lifespan in obese mice and in some short-lived model organisms but does not extend lifespan in normally fed mice; the lifespan-extending effect appears to be selective for high-fat-diet stress conditions. Bioavailability is poor (high first-pass metabolism); plasma resveratrol concentrations after oral administration are typically 1 to 10 percent of those that produce in vitro effects. Doses are typically 250 to 1500 mg per day. The clinical evidence base in humans is mixed; many endpoints show no effect at achievable plasma concentrations.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-097Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Panax Ginseng

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 55 / 100

Panax ginseng is the original Asian ginseng, used in traditional medicine for thousands of years. Ginsenosides drive the energy, cognitive, and stress-resistance effects. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundEstablished workhorse

34/100

Heavily studied classical adaptogen with real but modest clinical signals, poorly suited to mechanistic bench work as a whole extract

Look, Panax ginseng is the most-studied plant adaptogen on the planet. Thats not nothing. Ginsenosides like Rg1 and Rb1 have a genuinely complex pharmacology: stimulant-like profiles at some receptor targets, sedating through others, immunomodulatory across yet another set. The whole-extract story isnt clean, and that complexity is actually the compound’s biggest problem as a bench target.

Here’s the thing: if you want to study ginsenoside biology in 2025, you’re almost certainly going to work with isolated compounds, not whole root extract. Individual ginsenosides have more tractable pharmacology and cleaner mechanistic stories. Rg1 has received targeted attention for hippocampal neurogenesis and VEGF expression; Rb1 has a separate literature around neuroprotection via BDNF modulation. Those are genuinely more interesting research objects than the parent extract, and we’d rather see a library entry for one of them than for the whole root.

The clinical literature on whole-extract Panax ginseng is real but frustrating. Multiple RCTs document modest cognitive benefits (working memory, reaction time, fatigue reduction) and there’s credible evidence for erectile function and some immune endpoints. But effect sizes are rarely decisive and the trial heterogeneity is substantial: different extract profiles, different ginsenoside standardizations, different dose windows. The 2010 Cochrane review on cognitive function found some support but called the evidence insufficient for firm conclusions, and not much has shifted that calculus in the years since.

What we dont love is the translational uncertainty baked into a multi-component extract with competing agonist and antagonist activities at overlapping targets. Some ginsenosides upregulate NO synthase, others modulate ERK/MAPK signaling, others engage nuclear estrogen receptors at pharmacological concentrations. When you’re trying to attribute a human outcome to a defined mechanism, whole ginseng is a difficult read. The CYP interactions (CYP3A4, CYP2D6) are well-characterized and worth flagging for stack-interaction contexts, but thats advisory value, not discovery value.

Sourcing is easy. Standardized extracts at 4 to 7 percent ginsenosides are widely available and reproducible enough for preclinical work. We’re not dismissing the compound outright. There’s real signal here and a legitimate place in a reference library. But for bench researchers looking for mechanistically tractable targets with real discovery upside, the isolated ginsenoside fractions are where the interesting questions live. The whole extract scores where it does because the novelty ceiling is essentially at the floor, the mechanism story is multifaceted to the point of muddiness, and the bench utility case is significantly stronger for its own components than for the parent compound.

Novelty

22

Mechanism promise

35

In-category differentiation

30

Evidence quality

48

Translational signal

47

Research bench value

28

Rationale Panax ginseng has a genuine multi-decade clinical record across several endpoints but scores low on novelty and bench utility because the whole-extract format obscures mechanism, and isolated ginsenosides are the more tractable research objects; the OTC-herb cap (35) technically applies to the category but does not bind given the raw calculated score of 34.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Asian ginseng adaptogen

The classical Asian ginseng root with documented cognitive and metabolic effects mediated through ginsenoside saponins.

Abstract

Panax ginseng (Asian or Korean ginseng) is the most studied of the Panax genus, with millennia of traditional use in East Asian medicine. The active constituents are ginsenosides (Rg1, Rb1, Rb2, Rd, Re, Rf, and others), triterpene saponins with diverse pharmacological activities. The compound has documented modest effects on cognitive function (working memory, attention), fatigue, immune function, and erectile function. Mechanism is highly variable across ginsenosides (some are CNS stimulant-like, others sedating; some immunomodulatory, others not), making whole-extract pharmacology multifaceted. Doses are typically 200 to 600 mg of standardized extract (4 to 7 percent ginsenosides) per day. The compound interacts with many drugs through CYP modulation.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-113Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Thymopentin

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 50 / 100

Thymopentin is a 5-amino-acid synthetic peptide representing the active region of thymopoietin. Used historically for psoriasis and immune modulation. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundEstablished workhorse

38/100

A mature thymic pentapeptide with real approvals but overshadowed by thymosin alpha-1 across every meaningful axis

Look, thymopentin is a legitimate compound. Arg-Lys-Asp-Val-Tyr, five residues that happen to capture most of thymopoietin’s functional activity in a peptide you can synthesize cleanly and administer subcutaneously. It’s approved in Italy under the Timunox brand, approved in China and several other Asian markets for primary immunodeficiency and hepatitis B support, and has been used in clinical practice for decades. That’s not nothing. The compound is real, the mechanism is real, the human data is real.

The problem is context. When you look at where the thymic peptide space actually sits today, thymopentin is the compound you consider before you remember that thymosin alpha-1 exists. Zadaxin has broader regulatory approval, a more extensive multi-center trial base, better-characterized cytokine kinetics, and a cleaner reputation in the literature. If youre building a research program around thymic biology and T-cell maturation, thymopentin isnt where you start. It’s where you end up if thymosin alpha-1 is unavailable or if you have a specific reason to work with the thymopoietin fragment specifically.

The mechanism is genuinely interesting in principle: the compound appears to promote thymocyte maturation, modulates the CD4/CD8 ratio, and has documented NK cell effects. We don’t dismiss that. But the biology here is well-trodden 1980s immunopharmacology. The trials supporting its approvals predate modern RCT standards. Most of the published literature comes from the era when open-label studies in Eastern European and Asian centers were the standard of evidence, and replication across independent Western lab groups is thin.

What we find most limiting is the differentiation story. The thymic peptide category has a clear hierarchy, and thymopentin isn’t at the top. Thymosin alpha-1 outperforms it on evidence density, indication breadth, and regulatory reach. Thymosin beta-4 fragments occupy a different but increasingly interesting niche. Thymopentin sits in the middle: approved, real, known, but not best-in-class on any axis that matters for a serious research prioritization decision in 2025.

There is some bench value here. If you’re specifically investigating the thymopoietin receptor axis, or studying the minimal active fragment hypothesis in thymic hormone biology, thymopentin is the obvious probe. The five-residue sequence is well-defined and commercially available from reputable peptide vendors, which matters for reproducibility. We think this is where its research merit is most defensible: as a structural probe for a well-mapped biology, not as a frontier target. Honest assessment puts it in the established-mature bucket, useful but not urgent, and a distant second to the compounds that have pushed this field forward more recently.

Novelty

32

Mechanism promise

38

In-category differentiation

25

Evidence quality

48

Translational signal

52

Research bench value

40

Rationale Thymopentin has genuine regulatory standing in Italy and several Asian markets, which pushes evidence and translational scores above peptides stuck in preclinical purgatory, but it sits squarely behind thymosin alpha-1 on differentiation and behind newer immunomodulatory targets on novelty. The thymic peptide biology is real and the pentapeptide design is elegant, but this is 1980s-era pharmacology competing in a field that has moved on.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Synthetic pentapeptide of thymopoietin

A synthetic pentapeptide fragment (residues 32-36) of thymopoietin marketed in Europe and Asia for immunomodulation in chronic infections and autoimmune disease.

Abstract

Thymopentin (Timunox, TP-5; Arg-Lys-Asp-Val-Tyr; CAS 69558-55-0; molecular weight 679.78) is a synthetic pentapeptide corresponding to residues 32-36 of thymopoietin, a thymic hormone. The fragment retains the immunomodulatory activity of full-length thymopoietin. The compound is approved in Italy and several Asian countries for primary immunodeficiency, hepatitis B, atopic dermatitis adjunct, and autoimmune disease support. Mechanism includes T-cell maturation, NK cell modulation, and cytokine balance effects. Administered subcutaneously. Doses are 50 mg three times weekly in clinical use.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-130Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
N-Acetyl-L-Tyrosine

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 42 / 100

N-acetyl-L-tyrosine (NALT) is the acetylated form of tyrosine, marketed as more bioavailable than free tyrosine. Evidence for the bioavailability claim is limited but the compound is widely used in nootropic formulations. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundOverhyped vs evidence

11/100

Disproven bioavailability claim makes NALT strictly inferior to plain L-tyrosine as a research substrate

Look, we’ll be direct: NALT is essentially a marketing artifact. The pitch has always been that acetylation improves tyrosine’s bioavailability and CNS penetration, making it a smarter substrate for catecholamine synthesis than plain L-tyrosine. The problem is that human pharmacokinetic data doesn’t support this. Tissue deacetylases do convert NALT to free tyrosine, but the efficiency is poor enough that a substantial fraction of the administered dose is excreted as intact NALT in urine without ever contributing to tyrosine pools. You’re not getting more tyrosine to the brain; you’re getting less tyrosine to anywhere, with the difference ending up in the toilet.

This isn’t a subtle finding or a contested edge case. The PK literature is pretty clear: L-tyrosine itself achieves better plasma tyrosine elevation on an equal milligram basis. The acetylated form was supposed to behave as a pro-drug that shed its acetyl group efficiently in peripheral tissue. It doesn’t. Thats the whole story.

From a research standpoint, theres almost nothing useful here. If your question involves catecholamine substrate loading, you want L-tyrosine. If your question involves measuring how specific deacetylase activity affects amino acid bioavailability, NALT could theoretically serve as a narrow probe substrate, but that’s an extremely specific experimental design and not a general research tool. We don’t know of serious research programs using NALT for that purpose, and we wouldn’t expect to find them.

The mechanism column is equally thin. Catecholamine synthesis from tyrosine via tyrosine hydroxylase is foundational biochemistry understood for decades. There’s no novel angle here, no dual-target story, no surprising receptor biology. It’s a substrate for a well-understood pathway, and it’s a worse substrate than the unmodified amino acid. That combination, unremarkable mechanism plus inferior pharmacokinetics, is about as uncompelling as a research compound gets.

Differentiation is near zero, and it’s negative where it matters. NALT competes directly with L-tyrosine in the catecholamine support space and loses on PK grounds. It also competes with phenylalanine as an upstream precursor, and loses there too. We can’t identify a single application where NALT is the correct choice over a readily available comparator.

Honestly, this is one of the cleaner examples of supplement marketing outrunning the science. The acetylation story sounded plausible, vendors ran with it for years, and the actual PK work eventually showed the premise was wrong. Its still widely sold. Researchers looking at catecholamine biology should skip NALT entirely and work with L-tyrosine directly. Nothing here to chase.

Novelty

8

Mechanism promise

7

In-category differentiation

8

Evidence quality

25

Translational signal

10

Research bench value

12

Rationale NALT’s core premise, that acetylation improves CNS delivery of tyrosine, is contradicted by human PK data showing poor deacetylation and urinary excretion of intact NALT; all six axes score near floor because the compound is demonstrably worse than its unmodified comparator and carries no compensating research utility.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Acetylated tyrosine

An N-acetylated form of L-tyrosine with claimed superior bioavailability that has not been validated in pharmacokinetic studies.

Abstract

N-Acetyl-L-Tyrosine (NALT) is an N-acetylated form of L-tyrosine sold as a dietary supplement with claims of improved bioavailability and CNS penetration compared with L-tyrosine itself. Pharmacokinetic studies in humans show that NALT is poorly converted to free tyrosine by tissue deacetylases (the bulk is excreted as NALT in urine without contributing to tyrosine pools). The compound is therefore likely to be inferior to L-tyrosine on a milligram basis for catecholamine support applications, despite vendor claims. Investigators should generally use L-tyrosine itself.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-146Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Caffeine

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 65 / 100

Caffeine is the world’s most widely consumed psychoactive substance. It blocks adenosine receptors that normally promote sleep, producing alertness and reduced fatigue. The half-life of about 5 hours means that an afternoon coffee can disrupt nighttime sleep. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundGeneric nutrient

30/100

Thoroughly understood adenosine antagonist with no meaningful frontier research value left to extract

Look, caffeine. We don’t really need to introduce it. 1,3,7-trimethylxanthine is in every cup of coffee on the planet, and the research community has been publishing on adenosine receptor antagonism since before the compound was even fully structurally characterized in the 19th century. The mechanism isn’t contested. The compound isn’t mysterious. And thats precisely why it scores where it does.

The adenosine receptor story is genuinely elegant biology, and we’ll give it that. A2A antagonism in the basal ganglia drives wakefulness and motor effects; A1 antagonism in the cortex modulates neurotransmitter release; at supratherapeutic concentrations, PDE inhibition adds a wrinkle to the cAMP picture. We know all of this. A PubMed query for caffeine returns over 20,000 entries. The receptor pharmacology was worked out decades ago. If you’re trying to probe adenosine receptor biology cleanly, you’d reach for something like ZM 241385 or SCH 58261 as selective tool compounds. Caffeine hits A1, A2A, A2B, and A3 with varying affinity, and that nonselective profile creates confounds rather than clarity at the bench.

The evidence quality is high, and we’re scoring that honestly. Hundreds of replicated human trials, Cochrane-grade meta-analyses on cognitive performance, endurance, and headache prophylaxis, and a well-characterized PK profile including the CYP1A2 polymorphism story. Translational signal is strong in the sense that the compound clearly does what people think it does in actual humans. But the problem is exactly that: it’s been investigated so thoroughly that additional research contributes almost nothing new to the scientific picture. The confidence intervals around cognitive effects are already tight. The dose-response curve is mapped. Tolerance kinetics are described in literature going back decades.

What’s the bench case for running experiments with caffeine in 2025? The straightforward adenosine-antagonism questions are answered. Any novel angle, say caffeine in the context of neuroinflammation or in synergy with other neuromodulators, would typically position caffeine as a reference arm or positive control rather than the primary subject. That’s bench value in the context of controlling for a known variable, not in generating new biology. We score those things differently.

Honestly, caffeine sits in the library because it’s relevant to stack interactions and sourcing context, not because it’s a frontier research target. If adenosine receptor biology is what you’re after, newer and more selective tool compounds give you cleaner signal. Caffeine is foundational reference knowledge. The score reflects that: genuinely well-understood, genuinely effective in humans, and genuinely not what a serious investigator would center a research program around right now.

Novelty

8

Mechanism promise

12

In-category differentiation

10

Evidence quality

72

Translational signal

70

Research bench value

22

Rationale Novelty, mechanism interest, and differentiation all score near floor because adenosine receptor pharmacology is solved and the compound is the textbook example of a mature, fully-characterized molecule; evidence and translational scores are genuinely high but reflect past research saturation rather than future opportunity. The common-OTC cap (35) does not bind since the raw weighted score lands at 30.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Methylxanthine adenosine receptor antagonist

The world’s most consumed psychoactive substance, an adenosine receptor antagonist with widespread cognitive and physical performance effects.

Abstract

Caffeine (1,3,7-trimethylxanthine; CAS 58-08-2; molecular formula C8H10N4O2; molecular weight 194.19) is the most widely consumed psychoactive substance in the world, present in coffee, tea, cocoa, and many caffeinated beverages and dietary supplements. Mechanism is non-selective adenosine receptor antagonism (A1, A2A, A2B, A3) at typical dietary doses, with secondary inhibition of phosphodiesterase and modulation of GABA-A receptors at supratherapeutic concentrations. The adenosine A2A receptor antagonism is the principal driver of cognitive and motor effects. Pharmacokinetics: plasma half-life 3 to 5 hours; CYP1A2 metabolism (variable by genotype); renal excretion of metabolites. Doses for performance applications are typically 100 to 400 mg; tolerance develops within 1 to 2 weeks of regular use.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-162Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Berberine

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 70 / 100

Berberine is an isoquinoline alkaloid from goldenseal, barberry, and other plants. It activates AMPK (the same metabolic master regulator as metformin) and lowers blood sugar and lipids. Increasingly compared to metformin in supplement contexts. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundEstablished workhorse

39/100

Mature AMPK activator with real metabolic evidence, no longer a frontier compound

Look, berberine has earned its place in the metabolic pharmacology conversation, but that conversation is a decade old. This is an isoquinoline alkaloid pulled from Berberis, Coptis chinensis, goldenseal — plants that traditional Chinese medicine practitioners were using centuries before AMPK was even a concept. The mechanism turned out to be interesting when we finally mapped it: complex I inhibition driving AMPK activation, which is essentially how metformin works. That’s not nothing. But it also means berberine arrived at a mechanism that was already occupied by a drug with sixty years of clinical data behind it.

The clinical evidence in type 2 diabetes is real. There are head-to-head trials showing glycemic control comparable to metformin at doses around 500 mg three times daily. Multiple RCTs, meta-analyses, effects on HbA1c, fasting glucose, LDL. The problem is that the majority of this literature comes from Chinese research groups, and replication outside that consortium is thinner than the meta-analyses make it look. We’re not calling the data fraudulent — we’re noting that geographic concentration in the literature is always a yellow flag for serious bench workers evaluating translational confidence.

The bioavailability problem is honest and persistent. Oral berberine runs around 5 percent absorption. Thats not a small issue when you’re trying to understand dose-response relationships or tissue distribution. Dihydroberberine is the improved form and arguably the more interesting research compound today precisely because it addresses this limitation directly — but thats the derivative, not berberine itself, and the library should score what was submitted.

As an AMPK probe, berberine has value. If you’re running metabolic pathway work and need a natural-source complex I inhibitor, it’s there, it’s cheap, it’s well-characterized. What we don’t love is that metformin and AICAR exist as cleaner research tools in most contexts where you’d actually reach for one. Berberine’s probe niche is real but narrow.

The antimicrobial angle — gut dysbiosis, SIBO applications — gives it secondary utility that metformin doesn’t have. There’s genuine preclinical work on gut microbiome modulation and barrier function. Honestly, that secondary story might be more interesting to an investigator right now than relitigating the glycemic AMPK story for the hundredth time. But it’s not enough to move the needle on novelty or differentiation at a library level.

For a library built to surface what’s worth your bench time today, berberine scores poorly on novelty and differentiation. Everything that made it exciting circa 2012 is now the baseline. It’s not a bad compound. It’s just not a frontier compound, and frontier is what we’re scoring for.

Novelty

25

Mechanism promise

38

In-category differentiation

30

Evidence quality

52

Translational signal

55

Research bench value

40

Rationale Berberine’s complex I / AMPK mechanism is well-mapped and directly analogous to metformin, which monopolizes the comparison space; novelty and differentiation scores drag the overall down to the established-mature tier despite genuinely replicated clinical signal in T2DM.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Isoquinoline alkaloid / AMPK activator

An isoquinoline alkaloid from Berberis and other plants, characterized by AMPK activation with metabolic effects comparable to metformin in some contexts.

Abstract

Berberine (CAS 2086-83-1; molecular formula C20H18NO4+; molecular weight 336.36) is an isoquinoline alkaloid present in Berberis species, Coptis chinensis (goldthread), and Hydrastis canadensis (goldenseal). The compound activates AMPK through complex I inhibition (similar mechanism to metformin) with downstream metabolic effects: improved insulin sensitivity, reduced hepatic glucose output, modest LDL cholesterol reduction. Clinical trials in T2DM show glycemic improvements comparable to metformin in some studies. The compound is also used for gut dysbiosis and SIBO based on antimicrobial activity. Bioavailability is poor (~5 percent oral); dihydroberberine has improved bioavailability. Doses are typically 500 mg to 1.5 grams per day in divided doses.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-178Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Lixisenatide

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 60 / 100

Lixisenatide, sold as Adlyxin, is a daily GLP-1 receptor agonist with shorter duration than semaglutide. It particularly affects post-meal blood sugar. Approved for type 2 diabetes. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundEstablished workhorse

38/100

FDA-approved daily GLP-1 agonist largely eclipsed by weekly agents and dual incretins in every meaningful dimension

Look, lixisenatide is a real drug. FDA-approved, well-characterized, multiple phase 3 GetGoal trials with clean methodology. We’re not dismissing it because it’s obscure or poorly understood. We’re scoring it low because it’s been comprehensively lapped by its own pharmacological class.

The structural story is straightforward: Sanofi took exenatide’s backbone, added a six-lysine C-terminal extension, and got a compound with roughly similar GLP-1 receptor affinity but a 3-hour plasma half-life that necessitates once-daily injection. In 2012 that was defensible. By the time it hit US approval in 2016, liraglutide’s once-daily profile was already well-established and semaglutide’s once-weekly trials were underway. The timing was already awkward.

What we find genuinely interesting about lixisenatide, if we’re being honest, is its pharmacodynamic fingerprint. That short half-life produces a predominantly prandial effect: strong postprandial glucose suppression via gastric emptying delay, with relatively modest impact on fasting glucose compared to longer-acting agents. This has been cited as potentially useful in certain T2DM subpopulations where postprandial excursions are the dominant problem and the fasting glucose is already controlled. GetGoal-Duo 1 explored exactly this combination rationale with basal insulin. Thats an interesting pharmacological niche, but its a narrow one.

The differentiation problem is severe. On HbA1c reduction, lixisenatide is roughly comparable to older GLP-1 agents. On body weight, it’s clearly behind semaglutide’s 10-15% in the STEP program and nowhere near tirzepatide’s SURMOUNT numbers. The ELIXA cardiovascular outcomes trial showed non-inferiority, not superiority, for MACE, which puts it well behind semaglutide’s SUSTAIN-6 and LEADER (liraglutide) results. Non-inferiority is a regulatory floor, not a research signal worth chasing.

As a bench tool, there are cleaner GLP-1 probes available. If you’re running GLP-1 receptor biology, exendin-4 is better characterized, semaglutide has a richer literature for chronic studies, and the dual/triple incretins open more interesting mechanistic questions entirely. Lixisenatide sits in an awkward middle ground: too well-known and too outclassed to be a novel research target, but not indispensable enough to be a must-have probe.

We think the research value here is mostly historical and translational-pharmacology at this point. The prandial GLP-1 profile gives it a small niche in basal-bolus combination work. Outside that context, a serious investigator working on GLP-1 receptor biology or metabolic pharmacology in 2025 would pick something else.

Novelty

22

Mechanism promise

42

In-category differentiation

20

Evidence quality

65

Translational signal

58

Research bench value

28

Rationale Lixisenatide scores low on novelty and differentiation because it’s a 2016-approved exenatide derivative with no dual-target angle and clearly inferior weight-loss outcomes versus semaglutide; evidence quality is real (GetGoal phase 3 program, FDA approval) but the translational signal is modest, and bench utility is limited since better GLP-1 probes exist.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

GLP-1 receptor agonist

A daily-dosing GLP-1 receptor agonist FDA-approved 2016 (Adlyxin) for T2DM, structurally derived from exenatide.

Abstract

Lixisenatide (Adlyxin, Lyxumia; CAS 320367-13-3; molecular weight 4858.49) is a 44-amino-acid peptide GLP-1 receptor agonist developed by Sanofi and approved by the FDA in 2016 for T2DM. The compound is structurally derived from exenatide with a six-lysine C-terminal extension. Pharmacokinetics: plasma half-life ~3 hours; once-daily dosing. Approved doses are 10 to 20 mcg subcutaneously daily.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-194Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Mirtazapine

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 66 / 100

Mirtazapine (Remeron) does not work like an SSRI at all. Rather than blocking the serotonin pump, it blocks a brake on the nerve cells that release serotonin and norepinephrine, which causes those neurons to fire more freely. It also strongly blocks the histamine receptor that controls sleep and appetite, which is why patients on it tend to sleep deeply and gain weight. Organon brought it to market in 1996. Clinicians often reach for it when a patient needs sleep restoration or has lost weight from depression, since both effects can be therapeutic in that context. The trade-off is that the same antihistamine action makes morning grogginess common at low doses, and the appetite stimulation is unwelcome for some. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundEstablished workhorse

44/100

Mature approved antidepressant useful as a receptor pharmacology reference but offering little research frontier value

Honestly, mirtazapine is exactly the kind of compound that made a v2 rubric necessary. It’s a real drug, with a real mechanism, real clinical data — approved by the FDA in 1996 — and that’s kind of the whole story. The literature is enormous and thoroughly settled. Theres no frontier here.

The mechanism is genuinely distinctive in its class. Rather than blocking reuptake transporters like SSRIs and SNRIs, mirtazapine antagonizes presynaptic alpha-2 autoreceptors and heteroreceptors, disinhibiting both norepinephrine and serotonin release. Concurrent 5-HT2A and 5-HT2C antagonism then steers the released serotonin preferentially to 5-HT1A receptors. On paper, thats an elegant multi-target design. In practice, the enormous H1 histamine antagonism (Ki approximately 0.14 nM, competitive with first-generation antihistamines like diphenhydramine) dominates the experimental and subjective profile. Sedation and appetite stimulation are often the main events, and that H1 load is a real confound if you’re trying to isolate the noradrenergic or serotonergic piece — you’ll be managing sleep architecture disruption and weight changes in any animal model before you get to the signal of interest.

Evidence quality and translational signal score high here, but only because mirtazapine has been an approved drug for nearly three decades with a clinical trial base measured in the thousands of patients. The Cipriani et al. 2018 network meta-analysis in the Lancet showed a modest edge in response rate relative to some comparators, confirming it’s a competent antidepressant. None of that is news. Those scores reflect clinical history, not discovery.

Where mirtazapine retains legitimate bench utility: it does appear as a reference compound in alpha-2 adrenergic receptor pharmacology and as a 5-HT2 antagonist comparator. If your program is characterizing a novel compound’s activity at those targets, mirtazapine is a reproducible, well-characterized positive control. That said, more selective probes exist for both targets — yohimbine and atipamezole for alpha-2 antagonism, ketanserin and MDL-100907 for 5-HT2A — so mirtazapine’s bench value is mostly confined to the specific context of NaSSA pharmacology or combined noradrenergic/serotonergic interaction studies, which isnt a high-traffic area right now.

The off-label angles in cancer-related anorexia-cachexia and hyperemesis gravidarum are probably the most plausible spaces where mirtazapine could attract fresh research interest, but even those are secondary-utility questions on a known compound, not mechanism discovery. We think it earns a spot in the library as a reference standard and comparator tool, not as an active research target. Reach for it when you need a known quantity, not when you’re looking for something new.

Novelty

18

Mechanism promise

38

In-category differentiation

36

Evidence quality

72

Translational signal

68

Research bench value

46

Rationale Mirtazapine scores well on evidence and translational signal strictly because it is a 30-year-old approved drug with a large clinical trial base, not because it represents an active research frontier. Low novelty and a fully characterized mechanism keep the overall in the low-to-mid 40s; more selective tools exist for both its alpha-2 and 5-HT2 target spaces.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Tetracyclic atypical antidepressant (NaSSA)

A noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressant; a tetracyclic with strong H1 antihistamine activity producing pronounced sedation and appetite stimulation.

Abstract

Mirtazapine ((R/S)-1,2,3,4,10,14b-hexahydro-2-methylpyrazino[2,1-a]pyrido[2,3-c][2]benzazepine; CAS 85650-52-8; molecular formula C17H19N3; molecular weight 265.36) is a tetracyclic NaSSA (noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressant) developed at Organon and approved by the FDA in 1996 under the trade name Remeron. Mechanism distinguishes the compound from the SSRI/SNRI class: rather than inhibiting transporters, mirtazapine antagonizes presynaptic alpha-2 adrenergic autoreceptors and heteroreceptors, increasing both norepinephrine and serotonin release. Concurrent 5-HT2A and 5-HT2C antagonism redirects the released serotonin preferentially to 5-HT1A receptors. Strong H1 histamine antagonism (Ki approximately 0.14 nM, comparable to first-generation antihistamines) produces sedation and weight gain, often dose-limiting at higher doses. The compound has minimal activity at muscarinic, dopaminergic, or transporter sites. Plasma half-life is 20 to 40 hours; metabolism is via CYP2D6, CYP3A4, and CYP1A2. Approved for major depressive disorder; widely used off-label for insomnia and as an appetite stimulant. Used as a reference compound in alpha-2 adrenergic and 5-HT2 receptor pharmacology.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-210Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Phenelzine

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 64 / 100

Phenelzine (Nardil) is a first-generation, non-selective MAOI from 1961 that irreversibly destroys both forms of monoamine oxidase, the enzymes that break down serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine. The result is a powerful boost in all three neurotransmitters but with the famous catch: any food containing tyramine (aged cheese, cured meats, fermented soy, certain wines) can trigger a hypertensive crisis severe enough to cause stroke, because the gut enzymes that normally clear dietary tyramine are gone. Many drug interactions are similarly dangerous. Despite all this, phenelzine remains genuinely useful for atypical depression and treatment-resistant depression where SSRIs and SNRIs have failed, because the broad monoamine boost can succeed where narrower drugs have not. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundEstablished workhorse

35/100

A first-generation MAOI whose research moment passed decades ago; niche clinical value, minimal frontier interest

Look, phenelzine is sixty-plus years old. FDA cleared in 1961, it’s one of the original hydrazine MAOIs, and the research community has had decades to pick it apart. The mechanism is well understood, the liabilities are well documented, and the clinical niche it occupies, atypical and treatment-resistant depression, has been carved out since the 1970s. That doesnt make it useless, but it does make it exactly the kind of compound that scores low on a research-merit rubric built to surface things worth investigating right now.

The mechanism is genuinely interesting pharmacologically, just not novel. Phenelzine covalently inactivates both MAO-A and MAO-B by forming a hydrazine adduct at the FAD prosthetic group. Because the inhibition is irreversible, the effective duration of enzyme suppression is 14 to 21 days, fully decoupled from the plasma half-life of 11.6 hours. This produces sustained, non-selective monoamine elevation across serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine pathways simultaneously. There’s also a secondary angle that doesn’t get nearly enough attention: phenelzine’s hydrazine metabolites inhibit GABA transaminase, raising GABAergic tone and likely contributing to its efficacy in PTSD and anxious depression. We think that angle is legitimately underexplored. But calling it a novel mechanism in 2025 would be a stretch.

The tyramine problem is the defining liability. Dietary tyramine, normally cleared by intestinal MAO-A, accumulates under full MAO blockade and triggers norepinephrine release from sympathetic terminals, producing hypertensive crisis. The dietary restrictions are real and onerous. Modern selective reversible inhibitors like moclobemide avoid most of this, and that makes phenelzine a harder sell as a primary research focus. For basic MAO biology, cleaner tools exist: clorgyline (selective MAO-A) and low-dose selegiline (selective MAO-B) give mechanistically tighter answers without the tyramine confound.

The evidence base is real, if dated. Multiple controlled trials from the 1960s through the 1980s established efficacy in atypical depression, and the Quitkin group’s classification of atypical features, mood reactivity, hypersomnia, leaden paralysis, rejection sensitivity, was built partly around phenelzine response profiles. VA collaborative work extended phenelzine’s profile into PTSD. The clinical signal is not in doubt. The methodology is just pre-modern by current RCT standards.

We don’t see phenelzine as a compelling research target for most programs right now. It retains a specific clinical role for patients who’ve failed SSRIs, SNRIs, and TCAs, and it’s a genuine landmark in the history of biological psychiatry. But as a probe, cleaner selective tools exist. As a novel indication target, the low-hanging fruit has been picked. Honest score: this is a 1960s compound with a narrow remaining niche, not something sitting at the frontier of anything active.

Novelty

12

Mechanism promise

22

In-category differentiation

28

Evidence quality

58

Translational signal

68

Research bench value

35

Rationale Phenelzine is a 1961-approved hydrazine MAOI with fully characterized mechanism and mature evidence base; novelty and differentiation are both very low, held up only by evidence and translational scores reflecting genuine historical clinical work. No structural cap binds, but the raw calculation lands near 35 regardless.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Irreversible non-selective MAO inhibitor (hydrazine)

A first-generation hydrazine MAOI; a non-selective irreversible inhibitor still used for atypical and treatment-resistant depression.

Abstract

Phenelzine (2-phenylethylhydrazine; CAS 51-71-8; molecular formula C8H12N2; molecular weight 136.19) is a hydrazine class non-selective irreversible monoamine oxidase inhibitor approved by the FDA in 1961 under the trade name Nardil. The compound covalently inactivates both MAO-A and MAO-B by hydrazine-mediated cofactor adduction at the FAD prosthetic group; recovery requires de novo enzyme synthesis (approximately 14 to 21 days). The non-selective inhibition increases brain serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine concurrently, producing classical MAOI antidepressant pharmacology along with the well-known tyramine cheese-effect risk: dietary tyramine, normally degraded by intestinal MAO-A, accumulates and triggers hypertensive crisis through indirect sympathomimetic action. Plasma half-life is 11.6 hours, but the irreversible binding produces effective enzyme inhibition for 2 to 3 weeks. Hydrazine metabolism may produce hepatotoxic byproducts; chronic dosing requires hepatic monitoring. Approved for major depressive disorder; remains a benchmark for atypical depression with reverse vegetative features and for treatment-resistant cases where SSRIs and TCAs have failed.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-226Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026
Clonidine

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 60 / 100

Clonidine is a 1960s blood-pressure drug (sold as Catapres) that turned out to be unexpectedly versatile. It works by activating alpha-2 adrenergic receptors in the brainstem, dampening the sympathetic nervous system, the body’s stress response. That single mechanism explains why it lowers blood pressure, blunts opioid withdrawal symptoms, calms tics in Tourette syndrome, and reduces hyperactivity in ADHD (often as a non-stimulant alternative or add-on to stimulants in children). It is also used to manage hot flashes and as a sedating premedication. The drug is cheap, generic, and well-characterized, with sedation and rebound hypertension on abrupt discontinuation as the main downsides. Not stocked by Kodiac. This monograph is provided for research and educational reference.

Intrigue 0–100 blends mechanism novelty, evidence strength, and translational potential. Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.

Our opinion on this compoundResearch workhorse

45/100

Prototype alpha-2 agonist with real bench utility but essentially zero research novelty

Look, clonidine is not a research compound in any contemporary sense of the word. Boehringer Ingelheim synthesized it in the 1960s looking for a nasal decongestant, stumbled onto a central antihypertensive, and the FDA approved it in 1974. That backstory tells you a lot about where this thing sits in 2025: its mechanism was characterized before most of today’s investigators were born, and the pharmacology has not moved since.

The mechanism is presynaptic alpha-2A autoreceptor activation in the locus coeruleus, which dials down central noradrenergic tone. Secondary imidazoline I1 activity contributes to the blood pressure effect. Both of those stories are closed chapters in the literature. Theres nothing here that opens a new question; every pathway clonidine touches has been characterized to death, and the interesting molecular biology has moved to more selective tools. Dexmedetomidine is far more alpha-2A selective. Guanfacine has a cleaner CNS profile and is now the preferred agent for ADHD in most treatment algorithms. In differentiation terms, clonidine is the prototype that got superseded.

Where we do give clonidine some credit is bench utility. It remains the canonical alpha-2 reference standard for studies of noradrenergic regulation, locus coeruleus physiology, and sympathetic nervous system modulation. If you’re designing a study that needs a clean alpha-2 agonist as a positive control or pharmacological probe, clonidine is still what most labs reach for, partly because the literature comparator base is enormous. The PTSD-associated hyperarousal work, particularly the fear consolidation studies out of Pitman and Cahill’s groups, used clonidine as the reference intervention precisely because any new agent has to beat a known standard. That kind of indispensable-comparator role keeps the bench value score from cratering.

The translational and evidence scores are the only numbers that look strong here, and honestly they should, because this is an approved drug with decades of clinical use across four labeled indications. The rebound hypertension on abrupt discontinuation is one of the best-characterized discontinuation effects in all of pharmacology. But evidence quality for a research library score is about how much we’ve learned, not how much we’ve confirmed; at this point clonidine is all confirmation, no discovery.

We think this compound belongs in the library as a reference entry, not as something an investigator would build a program around in 2025. The score of 45 reflects that: real clinical and bench-utility credit, close-to-zero novelty and mechanism credit. Use it as the comparator arm, not the experimental arm.

Novelty

18

Mechanism promise

28

In-category differentiation

35

Evidence quality

78

Translational signal

72

Research bench value

65

Rationale Clonidine scores moderate overall on the strength of its well-validated clinical record and genuine utility as the reference alpha-2 agonist in noradrenergic research, but novelty and mechanism scores drag hard because this is a 1960s compound with a fully mapped single-receptor mechanism; more selective successors like dexmedetomidine and guanfacine have largely displaced it in both clinic and bench contexts.

Editorial commentary from Kodiac biolabs. Not a recommendation, not clinical advice. Research use only.

Central alpha-2 adrenergic agonist

An imidazoline alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist; an antihypertensive repurposed for ADHD, opioid withdrawal, and Tourette syndrome.

Abstract

Clonidine (N-(2,6-dichlorophenyl)-4,5-dihydro-1H-imidazol-2-amine; CAS 4205-90-7; molecular formula C9H9Cl2N3; molecular weight 230.10) is an imidazoline alpha-2 adrenergic agonist developed at Boehringer Ingelheim in the 1960s and approved by the FDA in 1974 under the trade name Catapres. The compound activates presynaptic alpha-2A adrenergic autoreceptors in the locus coeruleus, reducing central noradrenergic outflow and producing centrally mediated reductions in sympathetic tone, blood pressure, and heart rate. Secondary imidazoline I1 receptor activity contributes to the antihypertensive effect. Plasma half-life is 12 to 16 hours; renal excretion is the principal clearance pathway. Approved indications include hypertension, ADHD (extended-release Kapvay), opioid withdrawal, and Tourette syndrome; off-label use in insomnia, hot flashes, and PTSD-associated hyperarousal. Rebound hypertension on abrupt discontinuation is a characteristic adverse effect. The compound is widely used in academic neuroscience as the prototype alpha-2 agonist for studies of noradrenergic regulation.

Read the full monograph

The full reference document covers compound identification, discovery and developmental history, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, sourcing and quality verification, and a curated reference list. Embedded inline below; download for offline reading.

KDC-MN-258Open in new tab →

Download PDF →

FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic purposes. Not for human consumption. All information is provided for research and educational purposes only.

May 9, 2026

←Previous Page

1 … 62 63 64 65 66 … 69

Bench-grade research compounds. Cited research. Verified COAs.

kodiac.bio

Explore

Shop
Monographs
Lab Results
About
Affiliate program
Affiliate handbook

Account

Cart
My account

Help

Compliance
Contact

Quarterly dispatch

New batches and new monographs only. Unsubscribe in one click.

Write to us from the contact page to join the list.

Kodiac biolabs sells research compounds for in vitro and in vivo investigative purposes only. Products are not for human or veterinary consumption. Not for medical, diagnostic, or therapeutic use. By using this site you confirm you are acquiring research compounds for research purposes only.

Kodiac biolabs is not affiliated with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Products are research reagents, have not been evaluated by the FDA, and are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

© 2026 Kodiac biolabs LLC. All rights reserved.