Peptides DB
Research-centric peptide and protocol reference hub
Study 8 of 9GHRP-6 literatureJournal of clinical neuroscience : official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia · RCT · Phase 32026

Phase III Open-Label, Randomized Clinical Trial of Epidermal Growth Factor and Growth Hormone Releasing Hexapeptide in Acute Ischemic Stroke.

The study suggests potential benefits of EGF and GHRP-6 in severe-stroke patients, but further research is necessary to confirm these findings.

Read at Journal of clinical neuroscience : official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of AustralasiaAdd to compare

Where it sits

this study against the rest of the ghrp-6 corpus
0
Preclinical
6
Observational
0
Open-label
1
Randomised · this one
2
Reviews

Summary and findings

This study evaluated the effects of intravenous Epidermal Growth Factor (75µg) and Growth Hormone Releasing Peptide-6 (5mg) in patients with acute ischemic stroke. The trial involved 188 patients, with no differences in primary outcomes but suggested benefits in a subgroup of severe-stroke patients. The findings indicate a need for further research in this specific population.

How much of this paper we could read: full text read (0.80). We had a clear abstract, so the summary below closely tracks the paper. What this means →
mRS at 6 months for severe-stroke patients (NIHSS≥15) treated with EGF+GHRP6 was 2.6 (95%CI: 1.3-3.8) vs Control 4.7 (95%CI: 2.6-6); p=0.03.Phase 32026

Abstract

The authors’ words, as Journal of clinical neuroscience : official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia supplied them

Stroke remains a critical condition. Combined therapy of Epidermal Growth Factor (EGF) and Growth Hormone Releasing Peptide-6 (GHRP6) has shown potential benefits in stroke patients. The present COURAGE-2 study hypothesized that intravenous EGF (75µg) +GHRP6 (5mg) in acute ischemic stroke would result in 20% greater disability improvement at six months, versus standard care.<h4>Methods</h4>A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase-III trial enrolled patients within 12 hours of symptom onset, and NIHSS score of 5-20. Participants received the combined therapy (n=95; twice daily, 7 days) or standard care (n=93). Primary endpoint was safety and efficacy at 3 and 6 months, measured by modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Secondary endpoints included survival, Barthel Index, and blinded analysis of infarct volume. Sensitivity analyses used a NIHSS≥12 threshold.<h4>Results</h4>Patients were 63.5±11.3 years-old, 110 men, baseline NIHSS score of 9.5 (95%CI: 8.9-10) and mean time to treatment of 7.3±2.8 h. Severe adverse events occurred in 48/188 patients (none treatment-related), with 30/95 in the treated group (OR=1.92; 95%CI: 0.981-3.767). In the intention-to-treat population, no differences were found in mRS, Barthel index nor survival. However, severe-stroke patients (NIHSS≥15, n=27) treated with EGF+GHRP6 showed reduced disability (mRS<sub>6-months</sub>=2.6, 95%CI: 1.3-3.8 vs Control 4.7, 95%CI: 2.6-6; p=0.03), and mortality risk (HR=0.18, 95%CI: 0.03-0.96; p=0.045). In the middle cerebral artery territory, treated patients had greater infarct volume reduction (30 days; p=0.041). Similar outcomes were found using NIHSS≥12 threshold.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The Courage-2 study missed the primary endpoint but suggested potential benefit in moderate-to-severe stroke, warranting further studies targeting this subpopulation.

Background

The study addresses the potential role of Epidermal Growth Factor and GHRP-6 in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke, a condition where timely intervention is critical for patient outcomes. Prior research has suggested that growth factors may play a role in neuroprotection and recovery post-stroke. This trial is significant as it explores these agents in a clinical setting.

Methods

This was a Phase III open-label, randomized clinical trial. The specific population, sample size, dosing regimen, and duration of treatment were not reported in the abstract. Primary and secondary outcome measures were also not detailed.

Results

Not reported in abstract.

Interpretation

Without specific results or effect sizes reported, it is challenging to compare this study to prior literature or to assess the clinical significance of any findings. The lack of detailed results limits the ability to draw conclusions about the efficacy or safety of GHRP-6 in this context. Potential confounds include the open-label design and lack of control group data.

Key findings

  • Not reported in abstract.

Limitations

  • Not reported in abstract.

Elsewhere in the GHRP-6 corpus

CGHRELIN IMPAIRS EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT AFTER OVARIAN HYPERSTIMULATION.The Journal of endocrinology · 2026 · Delay in embryo development at GD 3.5 reversed by (D-Lys3)-GHRP-6.AnimalDInforming policy through evidence: A scoping review of factors that influence enrolment in community-based health insurance in East Africa.europepmc · 2026BMental health and legal statuses along the path to citizenship: A qualitative study of minority ethnic urban dwellers in Chiang Mai, Thailand.europepmc · 2026 · Not reported in abstract.HumanDDeveloping an approach to estimate the number of road traffic crashes at the national level using media-reported data.europepmc · 2026 · R² of 0.93 for training dataBAssociations between environmental exposure, lifestyle, and the risk of respiratory infections among 67890 adults: A population-based cohort analysis using UK Biobank data.europepmc · 2026 · HR=0.93, 95% CI: 0.88-0.99 for higher greenspace percentage within a 300 m buffer.HumanBHealthcare inequity in mpox testing intention: A socioeconomic status-stratified path analysis of medical discrimination and distrust among men who have sex with men in China.europepmc · 2026 · 50.7% of 2403 participants reported high testing intention.Human