Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40789979›Full record

ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2025

Regeneration or Risk? A Narrative Review of BPC-157 for Musculoskeletal Healing.

Flynn P McGuire, Riley Martinez, Annika Lenz, Lee Skinner, Daniel M Cushman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Therapeutic peptides and proteins: Status and developments in drug delivery.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. BPC-157 and Its Novel Hybrid Analogs as Inhibitors of Acetylcholinesterase.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Flynn P McGuireDepartment of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA. FlynnMcGuireMD@gmail.com.
Riley MartinezDepartment of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA.
Annika LenzDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA.
Lee SkinnerDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA.
Daniel M CushmanDepartment of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis scoping review aims to evaluate the molecular mechanisms, therapeutic potential, and safety concerns of Body Protective Compound-157 (BPC-157) in the context of musculoskeletal healing. Given the compound’s increasing availability, popularity, and its regulatory controversies, we sought to assess the breadth and quality of preclinical and clinical data supporting its use in musculoskeletal medicine. RECENT

findingsBPC-157 is a synthetic pentadecapeptide originally isolated from gastric juice and has demonstrated regenerative properties across numerous animal models. It activates several overlapping pathways, notably VEGFR2 and nitric oxide synthesis via the Akt-eNOS axis, promoting angiogenesis, fibroblast activity, and neuromuscular stabilization. It also engages ERK1/2 signaling, facilitates endothelial and muscle repair, and exerts anti-inflammatory effects. These effects promote angiogenesis, fibroblast activity, and neuromuscular stabilization, particularly in poorly vascularized tissues such as tendons and myotendinous junctions. Despite broad preclinical support, human data are extremely limited. Only three pilot studies have examined BPC-157 in humans, including its use for intraarticular knee pain, interstitial cystitis, and intravenous safety/pharmacokinetics. No adverse effects were reported, but rigorous, large-scale trials are lacking. BPC-157 demonstrates robust regenerative and cytoprotective effects in preclinical studies, positioning it as a potentially valuable tool in musculoskeletal medicine. Despite its growing popularity among athletes and its wide availability through non-regulated sources, there is minimal human data available. Until well-designed clinical trials are conducted, BPC-157 should be considered investigational, and its use approached with caution. This review highlights that given the robust preclinical evidence and high public interest, there is a critical need for well-designed human trials to assess the safety, efficacy, and clinical utility of BPC-157 in musculoskeletal medicine.

Indexed as

Musculoskeletal medicinePentadecapeptideResearch gapsScoping review

Identifiers

PMID40789979
PMCPMC12446177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.