Skip to content

Shop
Scholar
Lab Results
Learn
Vote
Forum
About

Search Kodiac

Sign in Sign up Account

Tag: MONOGRAPH

Retatrutide

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 91 / 100

Retatrutide is a triple agonist activating GLP-1, GIP, and glucagon receptors simultaneously. The glucagon component adds a fat-burning effect on top of the appetite suppression and glucose control of GLP-1/GIP. Phase 3 trials are ongoing for obesity. 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 Kodiac editorial, not peer-reviewed.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 compoundNovel frontier

82/100

Triple GIP/GLP-1/glucagon agonist with extraordinary Phase 2 weight-loss signal, currently the frontier of metabolic peptide research

Look, the GLP-1 era already redrew metabolic pharmacology, and tirzepatide added GIP to that picture. Retatrutide adds the third piece: glucagon receptor agonism. That’s not incremental. Stacking glucagon on top of dual incretin signaling gives you a compound that hits appetite through GLP-1, potentiates insulin dynamics through GIP, and drives hepatic energy expenditure and lipolytic output through glucagon. Three distinct pathways, one weekly injection. The pharmacological rationale is genuinely elegant.

The Jastreboff et al. Phase 2 trial, published in NEJM in 2023, showed 24.2 percent body weight reduction at 48 weeks in the highest-dose arm. That’s not a modest signal. Tirzepatide in SURMOUNT-1 topped out around 20.9 percent at 72 weeks. Retatrutide got further, faster. The dose-response curve is clean, the dropout rates manageable, and the effect on MASH markers adds another dimension the earlier incretins didn’t have. We’re not reading between the lines here, the Phase 2 data is unusually strong.

Mechanism-wise, the glucagon component deserves more attention than it usually gets in lay discussion. Glucagon receptor agonism in isolation would raise glucose, which sounds counterproductive. But in the context of GLP-1 and GIP coadministration, the hepatic energy expenditure and fat oxidation effects dominate while the hyperglycemic risk is substantially blunted. Its a balance thats been validated in rodent models and appears to hold in humans. Whether the hepatic effects specifically drive the MASH signal is still being worked out in ongoing arms of the trial.

What we like here is the research density. Retatrutide is useful as a probe for dissecting the incretin-glucagon axis in ways tirzepatide simply can’t address. You can ask questions about what glucagon receptor activation specifically contributes to metabolic outcomes by comparing the two compounds head-to-head in preclinical models. That’s real bench utility, not just clinical noise. The three-receptor design also opens questions about receptor crosstalk and downstream signaling that single or dual agonists leave on the table.

What we don’t like is the access picture. This is an investigational compound still in trials, not approved, not commercially available outside of study enrollment. Sourcing for preclinical work is achievable but not straightforward, and quality verification matters more here than with mature peptides. The long-term cardiovascular profile and the glucagon safety signal across diverse populations still need the Phase 3 readout to fully settle. But the Phase 2 results are the strongest weight-loss signal any injectable metabolic peptide has produced in a well-designed trial, and the mechanism has serious depth. For anyone working on incretin biology, metabolic regulation, or MASH models, retatrutide is the compound to watch right now.

Novelty

88

Mechanism promise

90

In-category differentiation

88

Evidence quality

68

Translational signal

80

Research bench value

68

Rationale Scores high across novelty, mechanism, and differentiation because adding glucagon receptor agonism to dual incretin pharmacology is genuinely new territory with strong pharmacological rationale, and Phase 2 human data showing 24.2% weight loss at 48 weeks is the strongest single-agent metabolic signal on record. Evidence score is moderated because Phase 3 is ongoing and regulatory status remains unconfirmed.

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

GIP/GLP-1/glucagon triple receptor agonist

An Eli Lilly investigational triple receptor agonist of GIP, GLP-1, and glucagon receptors with Phase 3 trials in obesity producing 24% weight loss at 48 weeks.

Abstract

Retatrutide (LY3437943) is an investigational triple agonist of the GIP, GLP-1, and glucagon receptors developed by Eli Lilly and currently in Phase 3 trials for obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH). The compound builds on the GIP/GLP-1 dual agonist tirzepatide platform by adding glucagon receptor agonism, which contributes additional weight loss through hepatic energy expenditure increases and lipolytic effects. Phase 2 obesity trial results published in 2023 showed approximately 24.2 percent weight loss at 48 weeks at the highest dose, exceeding the magnitude observed with tirzepatide. The compound is not yet FDA approved; Phase 3 program is ongoing. Pharmacokinetics: weekly subcutaneous administration; half-life supports once-weekly dosing. The triple agonist class represents the current frontier of metabolic peptide development.

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-084Open 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
NMN (Nicotinamide Mononucleotide)

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 72 / 100

NMN is a direct precursor to NAD+, the central energy cofactor that declines with age. Supplementation aims to restore youthful NAD+ levels. David Sinclair’s lab has been the most prominent in advancing NMN research. 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, active research

40/100

NAD+ precursor with real biochemical signal but modest clinical endpoints and no clear edge over NR

The NMN story starts with Sinclair’s lab at Harvard around 2013, when they showed that raising NAD+ in aged mice could reverse vascular and metabolic aging phenotypes. That was genuinely exciting work. The problem is we’re now more than a decade into the hype cycle, and the human data hasn’t delivered the paradigm-level translation the mouse studies seemed to promise.

The mechanism is NAD+ repletion via the salvage pathway. NAMPT converts nicotinamide to NMN, NMNAT converts NMN to NAD+, and from there you’re activating sirtuins (SIRT1, SIRT3, SIRT6) and supporting PARP-mediated DNA repair. The biology is solid and well-characterized. Thats actually part of the problem: there’s not much mechanistic mystery left. The Slc12a8 direct-transport argument gave NMN a theoretical uptake advantage over NR, but Brenner’s group and others have raised credible objections, and the debate sits unresolved. When a mechanism’s most interesting remaining question is a transporter contest with a competing form, you’re in mature territory.

Where NMN loses the most ground is differentiation. NR exists, it’s cheaper, it has comparable or longer trial history, and no direct head-to-head has established clear endpoint superiority for NMN in humans. Until that resolution happens, NMN is sharing a lane it hasn’t won. The FDA’s 2022 decision to classify NMN as a drug investigation under review further complicates the supplement market picture, though for bench research purposes thats mostly noise.

The clinical evidence is mixed in the honest sense. Yoshino et al. (2021, Cell Metabolism) ran a 10-week double-blind RCT in postmenopausal prediabetic women and showed skeletal muscle NAD+ elevation and improved insulin sensitivity. Real findings, modest N. The Japanese trial cohort (Igarashi et al., among others) added data on walking speed and physiological markers in older adults. Effect sizes have been real but unimpressive on the endpoints longevity investigators care most about: cognition, inflammatory burden, functional capacity at meaningful scale. Multiple completed trials are logged at clinicaltrials.gov; the overall picture is biochemical effect confirmed, functional outcomes not yet compelling.

As a bench tool, NMN earns its place. If your research touches NAD+-dependent biology, sirtuin activation, mitochondrial function under aging conditions, or PARP activity, NMN is a legitimate probe with a decent body of methodology behind it. That bench utility is real and keeps the compound relevant even as the longevity supplement narrative has gotten ahead of the evidence.

Honestly, NMN is a legitimate research compound that got buried under supplement hype. The signal is real, the mechanism is honest, but the clinical translation hasn’t kept pace with the animal data, and NR remains a credible competitor without a clear resolution. Researchers entering the NAD+ space should design experiments that directly compare forms rather than assume NMN superiority on the basis of the Slc12a8 story alone.

Novelty

35

Mechanism promise

38

In-category differentiation

32

Evidence quality

48

Translational signal

45

Research bench value

55

Rationale NMN’s mechanism is well-understood and the NAD+ repletion story is now over a decade into the hype cycle; it scores mid-range because the biochemistry is honest, the bench utility is real, but clinical translation is modest and differentiation from NR is unresolved. No hard cap applies, but novelty and differentiation drag the overall into established-active territory.

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

NAD+ precursor

A direct precursor of NAD+ and the molecule directly downstream of NAMPT, the rate-limiting enzyme of NAD+ salvage; popularized by David Sinclair for longevity applications.

Abstract

NMN (β-nicotinamide mononucleotide; CAS 1094-61-7; molecular formula C11H15N2O8P; molecular weight 334.22) is the immediate precursor of NAD+ in the salvage biosynthesis pathway, generated by phosphorylation of nicotinamide riboside by NRK kinases or by NAMPT-mediated condensation of nicotinamide with PRPP. NMN was popularized by David Sinclair’s group at Harvard as a longevity supplement for raising NAD+ levels, which decline with age. The compound is converted to NAD+ through NMNAT enzymes after cell uptake (presumed via Slc12a8 transporter or via dephosphorylation to NR with separate uptake). Animal studies show NMN supplementation reverses several age-related phenotypes (vascular, metabolic, neurological) by restoring NAD+ levels. Human clinical trials have shown plasma NAD+ elevation but clinical endpoint changes are modest. The compound is sold as a dietary supplement; FDA classified NMN as a drug investigation in 2022, complicating supplement market availability. Doses are typically 250 to 1000 mg per day.

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-102Open 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
Mucuna pruriens

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 58 / 100

Mucuna pruriens (velvet bean) is a tropical legume with high concentrations of L-DOPA, the direct precursor to dopamine. Used in Ayurveda and as a natural Parkinson disease aid. 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

26/100

Natural L-DOPA source with thin pharmacokinetic differentiation and limited bench utility

Look, Mucuna pruriens is essentially a vehicle for L-DOPA delivery, and L-DOPA has been a therapeutic compound since the 1960s. The mechanism isn’t novel – dopamine precursor supplementation is textbook neurochemistry. What makes Mucuna interesting at all is the question of whether the plant matrix changes how that L-DOPA behaves in practice, and honestly, that question is still mostly unanswered.

The small Parkinson trials comparing Mucuna to carbidopa-levodopa are real data points. A handful of studies, primarily from Tharayil et al. and a few Indian groups, found broadly similar motor benefit at equivalent L-DOPA content. Some reports suggest slower onset and potentially longer duration of effect compared to standard formulations. If that pharmacokinetic story holds up it would be genuinely interesting – but the evidence base is thin and uncontrolled. Trials are underpowered, and the variability in L-DOPA content across preparations makes dose-matching unreliable enough to compromise any clean mechanistic conclusion.

What we dont find compelling is the bench research angle. An investigator studying dopaminergic pharmacology, Parkinson pathology, or L-DOPA-induced dyskinesia is going to reach for pharmaceutical-grade levodopa every time. The reproducibility problems with botanical extracts – lot-to-lot variation in L-DOPA content, presence of uncharacterized alkaloids, NADH and putative monoamine oxidase activity from co-extractants – are liabilities in a controlled research context, not assets. The “other constituents” story gets cited occasionally but no specific pharmacologically active fractions have been rigorously characterized or isolated in replicated work.

From a novelty standpoint, Mucuna’s L-DOPA content was characterized in the 1930s and the Ayurvedic use predates that by centuries. Thats not a knock on its own – old compounds can find new relevance – but there isnt a new mechanism story here, no surprising receptor interaction, no novel target class that would organize a research program specifically around this plant.

We think the only genuinely interesting research question Mucuna opens up is the PK comparison to synthetic formulations, and specifically whether the natural matrix affects tolerability or dyskinesia burden in PD management. That question has clinical relevance and is underserved in the literature. At bench scale, though, utility is limited. Researchers interested in L-DOPA pharmacology have better-controlled tools; researchers interested in botanical ethnopharmacology have more scientifically active targets. Mucuna sits in an awkward middle ground – a well-understood drug dressed as an herb, without the quality control of the former or the novelty of the latter.

Novelty

18

Mechanism promise

20

In-category differentiation

20

Evidence quality

35

Translational signal

45

Research bench value

20

Rationale Mucuna pruriens is fundamentally a botanical L-DOPA delivery system built around a 60-year-old therapeutic mechanism; the small comparative PD trials demonstrate equivalence to synthetic formulations rather than superiority, and lot-to-lot variability in L-DOPA content makes it an unreliable research tool compared to pharmaceutical-grade levodopa.

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

Velvet bean / L-DOPA source

A tropical bean traditionally used in Ayurveda for Parkinsonian symptoms, the natural source of L-DOPA used as standardized extracts containing 15 to 50 percent L-DOPA.

Abstract

Mucuna pruriens (velvet bean, kapikacchu) is a tropical legume used in Ayurvedic medicine for Parkinsonism, infertility, and “vata” disorders. The seeds contain L-DOPA (L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine) at 5 to 7 percent of seed weight, the highest natural concentration known. Standardized extracts contain 15 to 50 percent L-DOPA depending on processing. The compound has been compared with synthetic L-DOPA in small Parkinson disease trials with broadly similar efficacy at equivalent L-DOPA content; some reports suggest slower onset and longer duration than carbidopa-levodopa formulations, possibly due to other constituents that influence pharmacokinetics. The compound is sold as a dietary supplement; doses are typically 500 to 2000 mg of extract standardized to 15 to 50 percent L-DOPA. Use for Parkinson disease should be supervised; the supplement market includes preparations with insufficient L-DOPA content for therapeutic use and potential misuse for non-Parkinson recreational dopaminergic effects.

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-116Open 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
Dulaglutide

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 72 / 100

Dulaglutide, sold as Trulicity, is a once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist constructed as an Fc-fusion protein for extended half-life. FDA-approved for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk reduction. 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

Solid first-generation weekly GLP-1 RA now clearly superseded by semaglutide and tirzepatide

Look, dulaglutide is a well-made drug. The IgG4-Fc fusion strategy for extending GLP-1(7-37) half-life to roughly 5 days was genuinely smart engineering in the early 2010s, and the REWIND cardiovascular outcomes trial gave us clean MACE data in a T2DM population with CV risk factors. That’s real science done properly. FDA approval in 2014, multiple large phase 3 programs, solid PK characterization. On evidence quality and translational signal, dulaglutide earns its marks.

Here’s the thing though: we’re rating research interest in 2026, not 2014. And the honest answer is that dulaglutide has been lapped. Semaglutide outperforms it on HbA1c reduction, weight loss, and CV outcomes. The SUSTAIN and STEP programs made dulaglutide look like the warm-up act. Then tirzepatide showed up with dual GIP/GLP-1 agonism and made semaglutide look cautious. From a differentiation standpoint, dulaglutide is now clearly the third option in a class where the top two have eaten most of the interesting research territory.

The mechanism itself, single GLP-1R agonism via a modified peptide sequence, is about as well-understood as any pharmacological target gets. Thats a weakness when youre trying to identify high-value research targets. The FcRn recycling angle is genuinely interesting from a drug-engineering perspective, and investigators working on Fc fusion biology might find dulaglutide useful as a reference construct, but thats a narrow specialty use case. Its not a probe for anything that semaglutide or a purpose-built research tool couldnt address better.

We also think the novelty ceiling here is just low. The GLP-1 receptor agonist class is decades old at this point. Dulaglutide didnt introduce a new mechanism, a new indication, or a new pharmacological insight. It refined the delivery profile, which is a formulation win, not a biology win. For a bench investigator building a research program, there’s very little that dulaglutide lets you ask that you couldnt ask with a better compound.

Where it still earns credit: if your program specifically needs a once-weekly GLP-1 RA with extensive CV outcomes literature and you want something other than semaglutide as a reference comparator, dulaglutide is fully characterized and well-sourced. The REWIND data set is genuinely good. But as an object of primary research interest, the score reflects a compound that did its job and got surpassed. Solid evidence, real translational signal, and an execution story that just doesnt stand out anymore.

Novelty

30

Mechanism promise

38

In-category differentiation

22

Evidence quality

75

Translational signal

72

Research bench value

35

Rationale Dulaglutide scores well on evidence and translational signal thanks to REWIND and large phase 3 RCTs, but novelty and differentiation are badly hurt by semaglutide’s dominance and tirzepatide’s dual-agonism story; the Fc-fusion engineering that was clever in 2014 is just background noise now. Overall lands in the low 40s because the compound is real and well-evidenced but offers a bench investigator almost nothing that a better GLP-1 tool doesn’t already provide.

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

Weekly GLP-1 Fc fusion

A GLP-1 analog fused to human IgG4 Fc for weekly dosing, FDA-approved as Trulicity for T2DM.

Abstract

Dulaglutide (Trulicity; CAS 923950-08-7; molecular weight ~63000) is an IgG4-Fc fusion protein containing two modified GLP-1(7-37) sequences. The Fc fusion provides extended half-life of approximately 5 days through neonatal Fc receptor recycling, supporting once-weekly subcutaneous dosing. The compound was developed by Eli Lilly and approved by the FDA in 2014 for T2DM. Approved doses are 0.75 to 4.5 mg weekly. The cardiovascular outcomes program (REWIND) demonstrated MACE reduction in T2DM patients with cardiovascular risk factors.

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-133Open 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
Acetyl-L-Carnitine (ALCAR)

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 60 / 100

Acetyl-L-carnitine (ALCAR) is the acetylated form of carnitine, an amino acid derivative that shuttles fatty acids into mitochondria for energy production. ALCAR additionally crosses the blood-brain barrier and donates an acetyl group to acetylcholine synthesis. 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, active research

47/100

Established multi-mechanism neuroactive with real clinical evidence but limited frontier novelty

Look, ALCAR is a compound most people in the nootropic and neuroprotection space think they understand, and most of them have a partial picture. The literature runs genuinely deep: two large placebo-controlled neuropathy trials covering a combined intention-to-treat population of roughly 1,257 patients, a 12-RCT meta-analysis in major depression, and decades of preclinical work across rodent, primate, and in vitro models in multiple independent labs. Thats a real evidence base, and we score it accordingly.

The novelty problem is unavoidable, though. ALCAR has been in the primary literature since the early 1980s, it is widely available as an OTC dietary supplement in every major market, and the foundational mechanisms (mitochondrial acetyl shuttle, cholinergic precursor via carnitine acetyltransferase-coupled acetylcholine synthesis, NGF upregulation) were characterized decades ago. The compound isnt advancing any research frontier right now; it is consolidating a position staked long before most current investigators were in graduate school.

What keeps the mechanism score from collapsing is the epigenetic axis, which is genuinely underappreciated in most discussions of ALCAR. The NF-kB p65/RelA acetylation story, worked out around 2011 in neuropathic pain models and published by Caruso et al. and subsequent groups, drives mGlu2 receptor upregulation at presynaptic nerve terminals through a transcriptional mechanism that L-carnitine itself cannot replicate. Coupled with documented H3 and H4 histone acetylation at relevant inflammatory loci, ALCAR has real post-translational and epigenetic activity that a serious investigator working on neuroinflammation or chronic pain biology should know about. This isnt a cofactor story; its actual gene regulation.

The clinical signal is strongest in peripheral neuropathy. The two large trials (Sima et al., De Grandis and Minardi) showed meaningful separation from placebo on pain endpoints, sural nerve biopsy fiber density, and vibratory perception thresholds at 52 weeks. The depression meta-analysis is interesting but the total N is modest and replication quality is uneven. The MCI and Alzheimer data is where the Cochrane review correctly pumps the brakes: effect sizes are small, not all trials show separation, and the 2003 Cochrane conclusion of insufficient evidence for clinical use has not been substantially revised.

The TMAO angle deserves serious attention for bench investigators designing chronic oral-dosing experiments. Low oral bioavailability means a substantial fraction of supplement-dose ALCAR is converted by gut microbiota to TMA and subsequently oxidized hepatically to TMAO, a metabolite with contested but non-trivial epidemiological associations to cardiovascular risk. Whether this is mechanistically consequential at typical research exposures is genuinely unsettled, and its a variable worth controlling in longitudinal rodent studies.

For in vitro and in vivo bench work, ALCAR remains a practical tool: a clean cholinergic primer in primary neuronal cultures, a useful probe for mitochondrial acetyl flux assays, and arguably the most accessible small-molecule entry point into the NF-kB/mGlu2 epigenetic axis in peripheral pain models. That bench utility is real, even if it doesnt move any needles in 2025. We think this compound belongs in a well-stocked research library as a mature reference tool, not as a priority target for new investigator programs.

Novelty

27

Mechanism promise

50

In-category differentiation

38

Evidence quality

65

Translational signal

60

Research bench value

48

Rationale ALCAR’s pharmacological distinctness from basic L-carnitine (BBB penetration, NF-kB/mGlu2 epigenetic axis, NGF modulation) puts it in the sulbutiamine-vs-thiamine category where the foundational-metabolite cap does not bind; the mid-tier score reflects a compound with genuine multi-mechanism depth and an above-average RCT base that nonetheless lacks frontier novelty and competes in a crowded neuroprotective space with modest effect sizes in the most-watched indications.

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

Acetylated carnitine / mitochondrial cofactor

An acetylated form of L-carnitine with improved CNS penetration, studied for cognitive impairment, neuropathy, and depression.

Abstract

Acetyl-L-Carnitine (ALCAR; CAS 3040-38-8; molecular formula C9H17NO4; molecular weight 203.24) is an acetylated form of L-carnitine that crosses the blood-brain barrier more efficiently than carnitine itself. Inside cells, ALCAR is hydrolyzed to acetyl-CoA and L-carnitine, both of which contribute to mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation and energy metabolism. The compound has been studied in cognitive impairment, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, depression (modest efficacy in mild-to-moderate depression), and male fertility. The compound is sold as a dietary supplement. Doses are typically 500 mg to 3 grams per day.

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-148Open 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
L-Theanine

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 60 / 100

L-theanine is the principal amino acid in green tea, structurally similar to glutamate and glutamine. It increases alpha brain waves (relaxed alertness) and is widely used to smooth out caffeine’s edge in pre-workout and 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 compoundBasic amino acid

32/100

Mature tea amino acid with a real but narrow cognitive story that has run its course as a research frontier

Cap applied basic-aa (max 32)

Look, theanine is a fine compound. Its not the problem. The problem is that the research story is essentially complete, and has been for a while. The alpha-wave EEG signature, the GABA modulation, the weak glutamate-site NMDA partial occupancy, the caffeine interaction attenuating cardiovascular and anxiogenic side effects — all of this is documented, replicated, and thoroughly understood. There is nothing left to discover here at the mechanism level that would interest a serious bench investigator.

The compound class is tea amino acid, and thats exactly what it is: a naturally occurring, orally bioavailable, freely sourced metabolite from Camellia sinensis. It crosses the BBB, it produces measurable EEG changes in the 8-12 Hz alpha band, and the 2:1 to 4:1 theanine-to-caffeine ratio is probably the most replicated nootropic stack finding in the literature. That replication is genuinely good science. It just isnt open science anymore — the field answered the question and moved on.

What we dont like here is the mechanism ceiling. Weak NMDA binding at the glutamate site is interesting in principle, but theanine isnt a useful probe for NMDA biology at doses that produce any alpha-wave signal in vivo. If you want to study NMDA allosterics, you reach for ketamine, MK-801, or newer GluN2B-selective compounds. Theanine is competing in a class where it brings no unique pharmacological leverage to the bench. The GABA angle is similarly unexciting — dozens of compounds modulate GABAergic tone more precisely and more potently.

The differentiation story is the best argument for the compound: it genuinely defines its niche. No other food-derived amino acid has this combination of alpha-wave induction plus caffeine-combination evidence. But that niche is, honestly, a consumer wellness niche, not a research frontier. The 2008-2016 wave of theanine-plus-caffeine clinical trials produced what it produced, and the citations now cluster around systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which is the literature telling you the primary research phase is over.

Bench utility is narrow. Useful if your program is specifically studying caffeine-adenosine-glutamate interactions in human EEG or rodent behavioral anxiety models and you want a clean comparator arm. Thats about it. We dont see a pathway to a new finding here that would generate meaningful research value in 2025-2026. Solid, mature, understood, and not particularly interesting as a target for an investigator with limited bench resources and better options available.

Novelty

18

Mechanism promise

28

In-category differentiation

38

Evidence quality

52

Translational signal

48

Research bench value

30

Rationale L-theanine is a food-derived amino acid with a well-replicated but fully mature pharmacology; the caffeine combination story is compelling consumer science but not frontier research, and the basic-aa cap binds at 32 because no genuinely novel indication or mechanism angle elevates it above the category ceiling.

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

Tea-derived amino acid

A non-protein amino acid present in tea with anxiolytic and attention-modulating effects when combined with caffeine.

Abstract

L-Theanine (gamma-glutamyl-ethylamide; CAS 3081-61-6; molecular formula C7H14N2O3; molecular weight 174.20) is a non-proteinogenic amino acid present in tea (Camellia sinensis) leaves, accounting for most of the soluble amino acid content of brewed tea. The compound crosses the blood-brain barrier and produces increases in alpha-band EEG activity associated with relaxed alertness. Pharmacology includes weak NMDA receptor antagonism (at the glutamate site, structurally similar to glutamate), modest GABA elevation, and modulation of serotonin and dopamine. The L-theanine + caffeine combination (typically 100 to 200 mg theanine + 50 to 200 mg caffeine) has the most consistent cognitive evidence base; combination produces alertness without the anxiety and cardiovascular effects of caffeine alone. Doses for monotherapy are typically 100 to 400 mg per administration.

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-165Open 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
Lithium Orotate

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 55 / 100

Lithium orotate is a complex of low-dose lithium with orotic acid. Used as a supplement at much lower doses than prescription lithium carbonate (5-20 mg vs 600-1200 mg). Some claims about better bioavailability are not well-supported. 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

Low-dose lithium salt with a plausible CNS-delivery hypothesis and weak controlled evidence

Look, lithium is genuinely interesting pharmacology. The GSK-3β inhibition story, the BDNF upregulation angle, the population-level data suggesting lower suicide and dementia rates in regions with higher groundwater lithium. These are real signals worth tracking. We’re not dismissing lithium as a research object. We’re being honest about where lithium orotate as a supplement compound sits in a serious research program, and the answer is: somewhere in the plausible-but-unvalidated stack.

The core claim for the orotate salt over lithium carbonate is improved CNS bioavailability at lower systemic doses, on the theory that the orotate anion acts as a carrier facilitating blood-brain barrier passage. That’s an interesting hypothesis. The trouble is its based mostly on a 1970s paper by Hans Nieper that was never rigorously replicated in controlled human pharmacokinetics. Contemporary head-to-head comparisons between the two salts in humans are essentially absent, and at typical supplement doses (5 to 20 mg lithium ion per day), plasma concentrations sit well below the therapeutic window established for lithium carbonate in bipolar disorder. Whether the orotate form actually achieves meaningfully different CNS concentrations at sub-therapeutic systemic levels remains an open question, and the current literature doesnt adequately answer it.

The epidemiological case is real and worth watching. Ohgami et al. (2009) found inverse associations between Oita prefecture groundwater lithium and suicide rates; the Zarse group replicated the directional finding in Texas water data; more recent European pooled analyses show weak but consistent signals for dementia incidence. That said, effect sizes are small and confounders are genuinely difficult to disentangle. Dietary lithium exposure tracks with water source geography, soil composition, and a range of socioeconomic variables. This is hypothesis-generating epidemiology, not mechanistic confirmation of the supplement’s clinical utility.

For bench purposes, lithium’s GSK-3β and tau-phosphorylation angle stays relevant to Alzheimer’s biology and neuroplasticity research. The honest problem is that if you want a selective GSK-3β probe you have better options. SB-216763, tideglusib, CHIR-99021 all offer superior target selectivity. Lithium is a pharmacologically dirty tool that hits GSK-3β, IMPase, MARK kinases, and probably other targets, which makes it interesting from a systems standpoint but noisy for clean mechanistic dissection. And if you specifically want to study low-dose lithium biology, there’s no validated reason to prefer the orotate salt over more characterized lithium forms until the pharmacokinetic story is actually confirmed in humans. The science is worth watching. The compound just hasn’t earned priority placement yet.

Novelty

30

Mechanism promise

45

In-category differentiation

38

Evidence quality

25

Translational signal

30

Research bench value

40

Rationale GSK-3β biology and the epidemiological low-dose lithium signal are genuine research threads, but the orotate salt’s claimed CNS-delivery advantage over lithium carbonate rests on unreplicated 1970s pharmacokinetics and there are no controlled trials specific to the supplement formulation at these doses. Novelty, evidence, and translational axes all land in the low-to-moderate range, pulling the overall well below the mid-tier.

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

Lithium-orotate complex

A lithium salt of orotic acid sold as a low-dose dietary supplement for mood and cognitive applications, distinct from prescription lithium carbonate.

Abstract

Lithium orotate is a salt of lithium with orotic acid (a pyrimidine biosynthesis intermediate). The compound is sold as a dietary supplement at low doses (typically 5 to 20 mg of lithium ion per day, vs. clinical lithium carbonate doses providing 200 to 1200 mg lithium ion per day for bipolar disorder). At supplement doses, lithium plasma concentrations are well below the therapeutic and toxic ranges of clinical lithium use. The pharmacology of low-dose lithium for mood and cognitive applications is debated; some epidemiological studies suggest reduced suicide rates and dementia incidence in regions with higher dietary lithium, but the magnitude is small and confounded. Doses are typically 5 to 20 mg lithium ion per day from supplements.

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-181Open 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
EGCG (Epigallocatechin Gallate)

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 60 / 100

EGCG is the principal catechin polyphenol in green tea. It has been studied extensively for cancer prevention, longevity, and metabolic effects. High-dose isolated EGCG carries some hepatotoxicity risk that whole green tea does 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 compoundGeneric nutrient

32/100

Mature green tea catechin with broad but promiscuous activity and consistently modest clinical translation

Look, EGCG has been the main character of green tea research for 30-plus years, and that tenure is both its credential and its problem. It’s genuinely the dominant catechin in unfermented tea, accounting for up to 80% of catechin content, and the early cell biology was exciting enough to generate thousands of papers. The NF-kB inhibition story, the reactive oxygen species scavenging, the modulation of cancer signaling pathways – all real. But “broad antioxidant and anti-inflammatory” is exactly the description that serious bench scientists have learned to treat with caution.

The mechanism problem with EGCG is promiscuity. It hits too many targets with not enough specificity to serve as a clean research probe. When a compound inhibits NF-kB, modulates p53, chelates metals, and scavenges radicals simultaneously, attributing any observed effect to a specific mechanism becomes genuinely difficult. This isn’t a knock on the chemistry – it’s a real limitation for investigators trying to isolate a causal story. The newer angle on DYRK1A inhibition, with the Spanish TRISOMY21 trial exploring EGCG in Down syndrome, is probably the most mechanistically focused work in the recent literature, but even there EGCG’s selectivity profile is a liability compared to more specific DYRK1A inhibitors now emerging from academic and biotech groups.

Bioavailability is the other persistent issue. Plasma concentrations after oral dosing are low – the compound undergoes extensive first-pass metabolism, the predominant circulating forms are conjugates, and the gap between what you dose and what reaches target tissue is real and substantial. This explains why the clinical literature is so inconsistent. Preclinical data in rodents looks reasonably interesting. Human data is modest, mixed, and frequently confounded by dose, formulation, and baseline differences across study populations.

We’ve seen enough of the clinical picture now to say: EGCG has real biology, but translation has disappointed relative to preclinical promise. There are positive lipid and body composition signals in meta-analyses, modest cognitive effects in scattered trials, and genuine hepatotoxicity risk at concentrated high-dose formulations that limits what investigators can responsibly test. EFSA flagged this and issued guidance limits for a reason, and that ceiling sits uncomfortably close to where effects start appearing in some studies.

Honestly, if you’re studying NF-kB biology, there are cleaner tools. If you’re studying polyphenol pharmacokinetics, EGCG is a reasonable model compound. If you’re studying DYRK1A, the selective inhibitors coming out of academic programs give you better probe quality. The research value is real but narrow, and the compound sits firmly in the established-not-exciting tier. Dont reach for it first.

Novelty

22

Mechanism promise

28

In-category differentiation

32

Evidence quality

48

Translational signal

32

Research bench value

33

Rationale EGCG’s decades-old literature and promiscuous polyphenol mechanism score it low on novelty and bench probe quality; a large but inconsistent evidence base, hampered by poor bioavailability, keeps translational signal modest despite extensive preclinical coverage.

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

Tea catechin polyphenol

The principal catechin polyphenol of green tea with broad antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity.

Abstract

EGCG (epigallocatechin-3-gallate; CAS 989-51-5; molecular formula C22H18O11; molecular weight 458.37) is the principal catechin polyphenol of green tea, accounting for 50 to 80 percent of total catechin content in unfermented tea. The compound has broad pharmacological activity: direct antioxidant, anti-inflammatory through NF-kB inhibition, modulation of multiple cancer-related pathways, and modest cardiovascular and metabolic effects. Bioavailability is poor; plasma EGCG concentrations after oral administration are low. Doses for cognitive and metabolic applications are typically 200 to 800 mg per day. Hepatotoxicity has been reported with concentrated EGCG products at high doses (typically over 800 mg/day on an empty stomach), prompting EFSA dosing limits.

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-196Open 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
Levomilnacipran

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 54 / 100

Levomilnacipran (Fetzima) is one mirror-image half of milnacipran, sold separately by Forest Pharmaceuticals in the US after FDA approval in 2013. It is unusual among SNRIs because it preferentially blocks the norepinephrine pump rather than the serotonin one, which is the opposite of duloxetine and venlafaxine. That noradrenergic emphasis was meant to deliver stronger effects on energy, motivation, and concentration in depressed patients. Trial data are favorable but not overwhelming, and the drug never gained the prescribing momentum of duloxetine. The parent compound milnacipran (the racemic mix) is widely used in Europe and Japan for depression and is approved in the US specifically for fibromyalgia. 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

47/100

A clean NET-selective SNRI probe with solid approval data and low novelty

Look, there are worse compounds to have in a library than levomilnacipran, but lets be direct: the SNRI class in 2026 is not where you go to find frontier pharmacology. Duloxetine, venlafaxine, desvenlafaxine — the space is crowded, mature, and the clinical effect sizes in MDD are modest across the board. What levomilnacipran does have, and what keeps it from being completely unremarkable, is its inverted selectivity. NET affinity at roughly 11 nM beats SERT at roughly 19 nM, which is the opposite of every other major SNRI on the market. That matters when youre trying to dissect norepinephrine versus serotonin contributions to an effect in a rodent model or a mechanistic human study.

The pharmacokinetic profile is genuinely clean. Mostly renal excretion, minimal CYP3A4 metabolism, near-zero off-target activity at adrenergic, dopaminergic, muscarinic, or histaminergic receptors. For pharmacology work where you want to isolate transporter blockade without confounding receptor hits, thats useful. Its the closest thing to a reference standard NET-preferring SNRI the field has, which is a narrow but real distinction.

Where it scores poorly is novelty and mechanism promise. The compound was approved by the FDA in 2013. Thats not a criticism — FDA approval means real phase 3 evidence, which the evidence and translational scores reflect — but it does mean the interesting questions have mostly been asked. If you want to understand NE reuptake inhibition in the clinic, the semaglutide-equivalent paradigm shift moment for SNRIs never arrived, and levomilnacipran didnt change that. We think the research attention it still generates is almost entirely as a comparator or a probe, not because anyone expects a surprise finding from the compound itself.

Honestly, the differentiation score is the most interesting conversation. Reboxetine is more NET-selective, but reboxetine has a problematic efficacy record in humans and regulatory problems in the US. Atomoxetine is NET-selective but carries pediatric ADHD baggage that complicates off-label use in adult neuropsychiatric research. Levomilnacipran sits in the middle: approved, clean, accessible, usable. For a lab running a study on noradrenergic contributions to cognitive function or pain modulation, it is probably the reference arm you reach for. Thats worth something. Its just not worth a lot in 2026 when the real action in CNS pharmacology is happening at psychoplastogen, kinase modulator, and mitochondrial peptide addresses.

If your program specifically needs a NET-biased SNRI with a clean off-target profile and real human pharmacokinetic data, levomilnacipran earns its shelf space. For anyone else, it sits comfortably in the established-mature tier: competent, useful in the right context, and not a reason to change your research agenda.

Novelty

22

Mechanism promise

35

In-category differentiation

48

Evidence quality

72

Translational signal

65

Research bench value

58

Rationale Approved in 2013 with a real clinical evidence base, levomilnacipran earns credit for NET > SERT selectivity as a research tool, but the SNRI class is deeply mature and the compound itself introduces no new mechanism. Evidence and translational scores pull the overall up from what its novelty and mechanism scores deserve; bench value is legitimate but limited to NE/SERT dissection work.

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

Pure SNRI ((1S,2R)-enantiomer)

The (1S,2R)-enantiomer of milnacipran; a pure SNRI with strong NET selectivity over SERT and minimal off-target activity.

Abstract

Levomilnacipran ((1S,2R)-2-(aminomethyl)-N,N-diethyl-1-phenylcyclopropanecarboxamide; CAS 96847-55-1 (HCl salt); molecular formula C15H22N2O; molecular weight 246.35) is the (1S,2R)-enantiomer of milnacipran, marketed as Fetzima by Forest Pharmaceuticals after FDA approval in 2013. Distinct among SNRIs for inverse selectivity: NET affinity (Ki approximately 11 nM) exceeds SERT affinity (Ki approximately 19 nM) by approximately 2-fold, the opposite of duloxetine and venlafaxine. The compound has minimal off-target activity at adrenergic, dopaminergic, muscarinic, or histaminergic sites. Plasma half-life is approximately 12 hours; metabolism is primarily renal (excreted unchanged) with minor CYP3A4 contribution, producing minimal drug-drug interaction potential. Approved for major depressive disorder; off-label investigation in attention deficit and chronic pain conditions. The dosing form is extended-release; 40 to 120 mg once daily. Used as the reference NET-selective SNRI in mechanism studies.

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-213Open 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
Pirlindole

Plain-language summaryIntrigue 51 / 100

Pirlindole (Pyrazidol) is the Soviet-era reversible MAO-A inhibitor, developed at the Soviet Academy of Sciences in the 1970s and registered in the USSR in 1975, several years before Roche’s moclobemide reached European markets. Mechanistically it does the same job as moclobemide (reversible MAO-A blockade) but with a chemical scaffold completely unlike its Western counterpart, plus a side-activity blocking 5-HT2 serotonin receptors that may contribute to its mood effects. Russian and Eastern European clinicians have been using it for nearly fifty years for depression. The Western literature on it is thin, partly because it never went through Western regulatory review and partly because most of its trials were published in Russian-language journals. 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

25/100

Soviet RIMA with dual mechanism but murky evidence base and minimal Western research utility

Look, pirlindole has a genuine footnote in psychopharmacology history. Developed at the Soviet Academy of Sciences and registered as Pyrazidol in 1975, it predates moclobemide’s Western arrival by over a decade and makes a credible claim to being the first reversible MAO-A inhibitor in actual clinical use. The pyrazinocarbazole scaffold is structurally distinct from the benzamide class moclobemide belongs to, and the secondary 5-HT2 antagonism gives it a combined pharmacological profile that, on paper, looks more interesting than a pure RIMA story. That combination, RIMA plus 5-HT2 blockade, resembles the rough logic of compounds like mirtazapine, which has real antidepressant signal with a different side-effect signature. So the mechanism isnt boring. It’s just not novel in 2026.

The real problem is the evidence base. Pirlindole’s clinical literature is almost entirely Soviet and post-Soviet, which creates a verification problem that’s hard to overstate. The trials exist, the approvals are real, and the compound has been prescribed in Russia for five decades. But the trial methodology, data accessibility, and replication status don’t map cleanly onto what a Western systematic reviewer or meta-analyst would accept. We’re not saying the compound doesnt work. We’re saying that in 2026, a bench scientist building a research program on MAO-A inhibition would default to moclobemide as the reference RIMA because the supporting literature is accessible, replicated, and methodologically characterizable.

What we’d want someone to understand is the sourcing reality. Outside Russia and a handful of former Soviet states, pirlindole is not registered and is genuinely difficult to source at research quality. That practical constraint compounds the evidence problem. If you want to study the RIMA component in isolation, moclobemide. If you want 5-HT2 pharmacology in isolation, ketanserin or pimavanserin. Pirlindole as a combined probe is conceptually interesting but lacks the accessibility and documentation to function well as a tool.

The RIMA class itself is in an awkward spot. Contemporary monoamine pharmacology interest has shifted toward MAO-B inhibition in neurodegeneration, or toward multimodal combinations pairing serotonin transporter work with specific receptor subtype targeting. Pirlindole doesnt slot cleanly into either conversation. For a narrow comparative pharmacology program studying the Soviet drug development tradition or specifically probing the RIMA/5-HT2 combination in animal models where sourcing is feasible, theres a case. Outside that framing, the research opportunity cost is high and the available alternatives are clearly better documented.

Novelty

18

Mechanism promise

30

In-category differentiation

22

Evidence quality

22

Translational signal

35

Research bench value

22

Rationale Pirlindole is a 50-year-old reversible MAO-A inhibitor whose entire clinical history lives in Soviet and post-Soviet literature, making evidence quality epistemically difficult to evaluate by modern standards. The secondary 5-HT2 antagonism is a mildly interesting differentiator but not sufficient to lift a compound that more selective and better-documented tools can surpass on every axis.

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

Atypical reversible MAO-A inhibitor

A pyrazinocarbazole RIMA developed in the USSR in the 1970s; the historical Soviet RIMA equivalent.

Abstract

Pirlindole (2,3,3a,4,5,6-hexahydro-8-methyl-1H-pyrazino[3,2,1-jk]carbazole; CAS 60762-57-4; molecular formula C15H18N2; molecular weight 226.32) is a pyrazinocarbazole RIMA developed at the Soviet Academy of Sciences in the 1970s and registered in the USSR in 1975 under the trade name Pyrazidol. The compound is a reversible competitive MAO-A inhibitor with secondary 5-HT2 antagonism contributing to its antidepressant profile. Clinical efficacy has been documented in Soviet and post-Soviet trials in major depressive disorder, dysthymia, and reactive depression; head-to-head data versus moclobemide are sparse. Plasma half-life is approximately 2 to 4 hours; metabolism is hepatic. The compound is well tolerated relative to hydrazine MAOIs and does not require tyramine restriction at clinical doses. Approval is restricted to Russia and former Soviet states; not registered in the US, EU, or other Western markets. Used as the historical reference RIMA from the Soviet pharmacological tradition.

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-229Open 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 … 36 37 38 39 40 … 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.