AOD-9604
hGH(176–191) fragment
- Injection
- Oral
- Nasal spray
- Suppository
- Gel or cream
Injection · Oral — no established dose: trials used 1 mg by mouth.
Available — priced per vial or unit, not by the month
The name is literal. AOD-9604 stands for Anti-Obesity Drug 9604, and the molecule is a 16-amino-acid piece of human growth hormone — residues 176 to 191, the tail end of the protein, with a tyrosine added to the front to stabilize it.
The design idea was subtraction. Full hGH does a great many things at once, and the ones that make it a difficult drug are the ones nobody wanting fat loss is asking for: tissue growth, rising IGF-1, worsening insulin sensitivity. Those effects come from parts of the molecule this fragment leaves behind. On that count the design worked. AOD-9604 does not bind the growth-hormone receptor, does not raise IGF-1, and does not degrade glucose tolerance.
What it does instead runs through beta-3 adrenergic receptors on fat cells. Activate those and you get the standard lipolytic cascade — cAMP rises, hormone-sensitive lipase switches on, stored triglycerides break down into fatty acids for oxidation. The fragment appears to increase beta-3 receptor expression, most noticeably in obese tissue where those receptors are otherwise suppressed, and to inhibit lipogenesis on the other side of the ledger. More breakdown, less storage, no growth-hormone baggage.
The mechanism did what it was designed to do. The trial built to detect an effect could not find one.
That is the whole story of AOD-9604, and it is why the evidence, not the availability, is the thing to weigh. In the first Phase 2b, every dose group lost more weight than placebo over 12 weeks, but even the best dose (1 mg) missed statistical significance. The larger 24-week trial that followed found under 1 kg of extra loss at any dose. The developer stopped the obesity programme in February 2007. For the study-by-study record and the pharmacology in full, read the deep-dive on PeptideWellness.
Who it's for (or who should avoid)
What it's aimed at
There is no established patient group, because there is no approved use and no established effect. What the research aimed at:
- Obesity, in the trials — roughly 925 participants across the program, measured on body weight over 12 to 24 weeks
- The specific case for a GH fragment — someone who wants hGH’s lipolytic effect without the IGF-1 and glucose consequences, which is a coherent thing to want and the reason this molecule exists
- Cartilage repair, in rabbits — a separate Lateral Pharma program, disclosed in 2013, using injection directly into the joint
- Food-ingredient use — the self-affirmed GRAS status from 2012 sits in that framework and nowhere near a therapeutic claim
The list contains no approved indication and no successful adequately powered trial. Anything written about what it does for body composition in practice is extrapolation from a 12-week result that a longer study failed to reproduce.
Who should avoid it
- Anyone with kidney or liver disease — the FDA’s passive database carries chronic kidney disease reports, and while passive reports establish nothing, this is the wrong compound to test the question on
- Anyone with an active or recent cancer diagnosis — the fragment’s metabolic activity has never been studied in an oncology context
- Anyone pregnant, breastfeeding or planning a pregnancy — no controlled human data of any kind
- Anyone buying a research-chemical vial rather than a prescription: unverified identity, unverified potency, unverified sterility
Route, dose and course
No formal US route authorizes a dose, and a few telehealth providers prescribe it anyway. Both halves of that are true.
On paper, every door is closed rather than ajar:
- No approved product — not FDA-approved for any indication, so there is no label and nothing to prescribe off
- No 503B route — not on the Bulks List, so an outsourcing facility cannot make it
- No 503A authorization — its nomination was withdrawn, and on the FDA list current as of April 22, 2026 it appears in no category at all, so no list authorizes a compounding pharmacy either
- GRAS is not approval — the June 2012 self-affirmation is a food-additive judgment about eating something, not a drug authorization
In practice, one telehealth seller we track lists it compounded by a 503A pharmacy, as an injectable vial and as a sublingual troche, on a clinician’s prescription.
For the record, the trials that produced the positive signal used 1 mg by mouth, and Rx Peps Direct, a seller we track, lists 0.3 mg (300 mcg) per injection without saying how often (checked 16 October 2026). Those two do not match each other, and neither is a dose a trial has shown to work.
Stage by stage
Read this first. These are trial windows, not a protocol. No dose has ever been established, so there is no standard course to run. Both windows come from the developer's own results announcement.
The windows below are trial endpoints rather than a course, because no course has been established. What they show is a compound that missed significance even in its best trial, and then found under 1 kg of extra loss in the larger one — the shape of a signal that was not there.
- WEEK 12The first trial's best resultIn the first Phase 2b, with no diet programme, every dose group lost more weight than placebo by week 12. The best was 1 mg by mouth, and even that missed statistical significance (p=0.1). Source: Metabolic Pharmaceuticals, ASX announcement 21 Feb 2007 (SEC copy) (checked Oct 17, 2026)
- WEEK 12–24The larger trialThe OPTIONS trial gave 536 people a diet and exercise programme plus the drug or placebo for 24 weeks. Weight loss beyond placebo was under 1 kg in every dose group, at week 12 and at week 24. Source: Same announcement, Appendix 2 (checked Oct 17, 2026)
- AFTERNo maintenance questionThe developer ended the obesity programme on 21 February 2007. There was no Phase 3, and no later trial has revisited the question. Source: Same announcement, page 1 (checked Oct 17, 2026)
Available — priced per vial or unit, not by the month
No seller here prices it by the month. Each figure is what the seller publishes, in its own unit — a vial, a spray or a capsule — with the exclusion spelled out. How long a unit lasts depends on the dose a prescriber sets.
| Provider | Published price | What that figure excludes | Coverage | Their own site |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RxPepsDirectPer-vial prices, 503A pharmacy in Texas | $80 per vialread 2026-11-04 | The $39 telehealth visit, charged per order. | A named list | Go to site |
Will it work where you live?
Most sellers claim all fifty states or publish nothing about coverage; a few name the states they serve or the ones they exclude, and the Coverage column says which. Either way it is the seller's own claim, so we can't filter this list by state without inventing a fact. What we can tell you is which state-level rules decide access: telehealth rules, non-resident pharmacy licensing, and who is allowed to prescribe.
Prices and providers change. We keep track.
Questions we get about AOD-9604
Is AOD-9604 FDA-approved?
No, and it never got close. It was tested in several human obesity trials — roughly 925 participants across the program — and the adequately powered one failed. There is no approved label for it, which also means there is nothing for a clinician to prescribe it off. It does hold self-affirmed GRAS status from June 2012, and that is worth being precise about: GRAS is a food-additive framework covering whether an ingredient is safe to eat. It is not a drug approval, it authorizes no therapeutic claim, and it is frequently quoted as though it were the former.
Can I get it prescribed?
Some telehealth providers will prescribe it, but nothing formally authorizes it. It is not FDA-approved, so there is no label. It is not on the 503B Bulks List, so an outsourcing facility cannot make it. And on the FDA list current as of April 22, 2026 it sits in no 503A category at all — it is in the agency's 'nominated but withdrawn' table — so no list authorizes a compounding pharmacy to prepare it from bulk. A provider that prescribes it is relying on a 503A pharmacy compounding it regardless. The other supply is research-chemical vials sold online with no verified identity, potency or sterility, which is not a supply route for something you intend to inject.
See what licensed providers actually carry →What did the trials actually show?
The developer's own results announcement tells it plainly. In the first Phase 2b, with no diet programme, all five dose groups lost more weight than placebo over 12 weeks; the best was 1 mg, and higher doses did not do better. Even 1 mg missed statistical significance (p=0.1), reaching it only in women. The larger OPTIONS trial then added diet and exercise for everyone and found under 1 kg of extra loss at any dose, at 12 or 24 weeks. A drug whose effect does not grow with the dose, and then shrinks in the larger trial, is usually telling you the first signal was noise.
Is it safe?
In the trials, yes, as far as they went: side effects were mild and comparable to placebo across roughly 925 participants, with no serious adverse events. Two caveats matter more than that sentence. The FDA's passive adverse-event database carries reports of chronic kidney disease and "drug ineffective" entries — uncontrolled reports that cannot establish causation, but are on the record. And trial safety is safety of a known compound at a known dose from a known manufacturer, which describes nothing you can currently buy.
What about the joint-repair research?
That is a separate program and a separate claim. A rabbit osteoarthritis model, disclosed by Lateral Pharma in February 2013, showed cartilage repair after injection directly into the joint. It is an interesting result and it is a rabbit, given an intra-articular injection, for a condition that has nothing to do with fat loss. It does not transfer to a person injecting subcutaneously for weight loss, and the two lines of research are routinely blended together in copy that sells the compound.
How much does it cost?
The sellers in the price table on this page price it per vial or unit rather than by the month, each with the date we read it. A vial buys a quantity rather than a month, and with no established dose there is no standard month to price. The table on this page also says what each figure leaves out, such as a visit fee charged per order. Prices attached to research-chemical powders sold without a prescription are a different kind of transaction. Insurance does not cover it.
How the bill breaks downWe publish no medical reviewer by design. Every claim on this page traces to a source we hold on file, and the reviewed write-up with those citations lives on our hub. Read the full research on PeptideWellness ↗
The latest peptide research and reviews, in your inbox
We are preparing a newsletter: independent updates on peptide therapy, news from compounding pharmacies, and guides. Leave your email and we will send the first issue as soon as it launches.
