Dosage calculator
Menu ☰

Good questions. Plain English. Sources included.

← All peptide guides

Brain & mood · Small condition-specific human trial

ARA-290 / Cibinetide

Fictional visual analogy: signal cable inspector
Fictional visual analogy: signal cable inspector

ARA-290, also called cibinetide, came from an interesting observation about erythropoietin: part of that molecule appears to be involved in tissue-protection signalling without needing to make more red blood cells.

Educational guide · evidence level shown throughout

THE ONE-MINUTE PUB CHAT

THE NERVE FIRE BRIGADE

ARA-290, also called cibinetide, came from an interesting observation about erythropoietin: part of that molecule appears to be involved in tissue-protection signalling without needing to make more red blood cells.

ARA-290 was designed to chase that repair signal, particularly through what researchers call the innate repair receptor.

Think of ordinary erythropoietin as a bloke who runs both the blood factory and the emergency repair team. ARA-290 tries to take his fire helmet while leaving the blood factory alone.

That is why researchers have looked at it in small-fibre neuropathy, where tiny damaged nerves can cause burning, pain and altered sensation. Small human studies have produced some encouraging symptom and nerve findings, but this is still specialised research rather than an established general nerve treatment.

Interesting fire engine. Not yet the NHS turning up with a fleet.

The joke is an analogy, not a clinical claim.

Overview illustrationQuick orientation

Evidence update: 6 October 2026

What is ARA-290 / Cibinetide?

ARA-290, also called cibinetide, came from an interesting observation about erythropoietin: part of that molecule appears to be involved in tissue-protection signalling without needing to make more red blood cells.

What it is / targetsInnate repair receptor (EPOR/CD131) signalling; designed to retain tissue-protective signalling without erythropoiesis.
What researchers studiedSmall human studies in sarcoidosis and diabetic small-fibre neuropathy assessed pain and nerve-related outcomes.
Evidence snapshotSmall condition-specific human trial

Why people are interested

The potential benefits, unpacked.

Here are the goals and claims that bring readers to this guide. The evidence note shows which part is demonstrated, early research or still a question.

The headline interest

Small human studies in sarcoidosis and diabetic small-fibre neuropathy assessed pain and nerve-related outcomes.

What the mechanism suggests

Innate repair receptor (EPOR/CD131) signalling; designed to retain tissue-protective signalling without erythropoiesis.

What still needs proving

The key question is whether the claimed benefit has been demonstrated in controlled human studies using the same compound, route and population.

What is it actually doing?

Innate repair receptor (EPOR/CD131) signalling; designed to retain tissue-protective signalling without erythropoiesis.

The important distinction is between changing a biomarker or pathway and producing a meaningful outcome that people can feel, measure or sustain.

Mechanism is not outcome. A biologically interesting pathway does not by itself prove a useful effect in people.
Results illustrationResults at a glance

Human evidence

What did the studies actually find?

1 highlighted

Human study deep dive

The most informative human evidence we could identify is translated below, with the original source linked.

Study evidence illustrationStudy evidence

Study deep dives

The important studies, translated into normal English.

Each synopsis keeps the trial design, actual results and limitations together. Graphs below are redrawn from the cited numerical results so you can see the size of the effect without having to decode a journal figure.

Sarcoidosis small-fibre neuropathy pilot — 2012

Randomised, double-blind pilot · 22 patients · 4 weeks

Patients received ARA-290 2 mg intravenously three times weekly or placebo. The small-fibre neuropathy symptom score improved by 11.5 points with ARA-290 versus 2.9 with placebo; pain and fatigue improved in both groups.

Peptalk takeaway

A small, condition-specific human signal exists, but this was an exploratory pilot rather than proof for general nerve repair.

Key result at a glanceRedrawn from the numerical results reported in the cited source.
SFN symptom score change
-11.5
Placebo
-2.9

What it doesn't prove: Small sample, short duration and one specific neuropathy population.

Read the original study / source ↗
Dose comparison illustrationDosing reference

Research, licensed & reported protocols

What doses and schedules are actually documented?

Human research or licensed product information is separated from clinic and community practice. These are source-attributed reference protocols, not personalised dosing recommendations.

Human research / licensed or product dosing

Protocol / contextAmount & frequencyDurationTitrationEvidence
Phase 2b sarcoidosis1, 4 or 8 mg SC once daily28 consecutive daysFixed-dose parallel armsEU trial registry
Neuropathy programmes4 mg SC once daily28 days in key trialsFixedHuman Phase 2

Community / clinic / specialist protocols

PatternAmount & frequencyCycleProgressionStatus
Recurring research-community range1–4 mg SC daily~4 weeksUsually no titrationCommunity mirrors trial duration; 4 mg common
Evidence reality check

1/4/8 mg daily human arms are documented. Longer cycles are much less established.

Dosing sourcesEU trial results ↗

Evidence checked: 7 October 2026

Routes and formulations matter. A topical study does not validate injection; an IV research dose does not establish a fixed SC dose; and evidence for one molecular form must not be silently transferred to another.

Community reports illustrationCommunity reports

Community reports

What are people actually doing?

Anecdote, not evidence. These examples document community practice and experiences. They do not establish safety, efficacy or an appropriate dose.

Community experience exists, but is anecdotal

Forums discuss schedules, effects and side effects, but posts are uncontrolled self-reports and product identity may be uncertain. Use them to understand what people report—not to estimate efficacy or establish a dose.

View the discussion on Reddit ↗
Safety illustrationSafety and uncertainty

Safety, side effects & what we don't know

Small condition-specific studies; not a general treatment for nerve damage.

Product identity, sterility and concentration are additional uncertainties for unlicensed research products. Evidence from an approved medicine or a clinical trial should not be transferred automatically to a differently sourced product.

Educational information only. Research compounds, trial protocols and community reports should not be treated as individual medical advice.
Questions illustrationQuestions

Questions worth asking

What is the strongest evidence here?

A small, condition-specific human signal exists, but this was an exploratory pilot rather than proof for general nerve repair.

Does a biological mechanism prove the claimed benefit?

No. Receptor activity, cell effects and animal results can justify research, but controlled human outcomes are a separate evidential step.

Is the research protocol a recommended dose?

No. The site reports study protocols to explain the evidence. It does not turn them into personalised self-use instructions.

Sources illustrationPrimary sources

Studies, sources & further reading

Sarcoidosis small-fibre neuropathy pilot — 2012 ↗Search PubMed for ARA-290 / Cibinetide ↗Search ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

External links are provided for transparency and further reading. Linking to a study, discussion or organisation does not mean Peptides Peptalk endorses every conclusion on that page.