One Cerluten trial. Twenty-nine related studies.
There is exactly one published study of Cerluten itself. Everything else is related research on cortex-derived or synthetic brain peptides: Cortexin, Cortagen, Pinealon, KED and the wider Khavinson short-peptide work. Each PubMed entry below has been checked against PubMed, and each is labelled by what kind of evidence it is.
The 2004 clinical study
Clinical study of the peptide bioregulator Cerluten, St Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology. Not indexed on PubMed.
- Setting
- The Institute’s Medical Center, October 2003 to February 2004
- Participants
- 48 patients with CNS diseases, including after-effects of traumatic brain injury and post-stroke conditions
- Control
- 37 patients who received standard treatment only
- Dosing
- 1–2 capsules, 2–3 times daily for 10–20 days, on top of standard treatment
- Reported results
- A clinical result in 64.6% of cases, a satisfactory result in 22.9%, and no positive effect in 12.5%. No negative effects on patients were reported.
- Limits
- Open-label, run at the developer’s own institution, subjective outcomes, and never independently replicated
- Where to read it
- QI Supplements · Antiaging Systems · Antiaging Nutrition
This is the only direct evidence for Cerluten. It is a small, open-label report from the institution that developed the product. Treat it as a signal worth testing, not as proof.
Citation notes
Common errors in what is written about Cerluten, and how this site handles them.
Cortagen is AEDP, not AEDG
The brain cortex extract was reduced to Cortagen (AEDP), not AEDG. Tying Cerluten to the AEDG sequence reflects confusion in marketing materials, not biochemistry. AEDG (Epitalon) studies are included here as related mechanism work only.
PMID 24003726 is often mislabelled
It is “Peptide bioregulators: the new class of geroprotectors. Message 2. Clinical studies results” (Khavinson, Kuznik, Ryzhak, Adv Gerontol 2013), not “Peptide bioregulation of aging: results and prospects.”
Some published reference lists are broken
At least one widely copied Cerluten reference list has malformed PubMed links. Its citation for “Peptide bioregulation of aging” (PMID 11707934) resolves to an unrelated paper on stress-induced senescence.
Most of this work comes from one programme
Nearly every study here was authored by, or with, the St Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology. Independent replication is scarce.