Where the category stands in May 2026 — what's available, who to trust, what costs what. 22-min read, medically reviewed.
Read the guideAn independent overview of the compounded-GLP-1 telehealth market and the providers we cover — market size, what the FDA changed, and an honest read on each.
View the provider overviewOverview & reviewsPrimers for newcomers and deep dives for the curious. The foundation articles are published; more are in the pipeline.
View all Learn articlesWhat compounded and branded semaglutide and tirzepatide actually cost, from each provider's own published pricing.
Anxiolytic and nootropic peptides — Selank, Semax, and related compounds. Most have a longer research history outside the US and a thin FDA footprint.
Cognitive and mood peptides are the smallest commercial category we cover — and the most heavily skewed toward the eastern-European medical tradition. Two of the four compounds in this category (Selank and Semax) are registered as drugs in Russia, where they have decades of clinical use and an established Russian-language literature, but have no FDA approval and effectively no Western peer-reviewed RCT footprint. A third compound (Cerebrolysin) is the most-studied of the cohort by a wide margin, with multiple Cochrane reviews — and the highest-quality systematic reviews on hard clinical outcomes have been largely negative or inconclusive. The fourth (Dihexa) sits at the preclinical edge. This page is the honest read on a category where geography, regulatory tradition, and editorial source-hierarchy all matter.
None of the compounds in this category is FDA-approved. Cerebrolysin, Selank, Semax, and Dihexa all reach US patients exclusively through compounding pharmacies, research-chemical suppliers, or international gray-market channels. The compounding-pathway architecture is the same one detailed in our compounded vs branded peptides explainer.
The relevant regulatory context here is that two compounds are registered as drugs in Russia and have been in clinical use there for decades:
- Selank (Селанк) — a heptapeptide developed at the V.V. Zakusov Research Institute of Pharmacology in Moscow, registered in the Russian Federation for anxiolytic and asthenic-condition indications. The active sequence is a modification of human tuftsin, a tetrapeptide derived from immunoglobulin. - Semax (Семакс) — a synthetic ACTH(4-10) analog developed at the Lomonosov Moscow State University, registered in the Russian Federation for indications including ischemic stroke recovery and asthenic disorders. Both compounds are typically administered as intranasal sprays in their Russian clinical use.
We treat the Russian regulatory registration as a Tier B primary source — it is a real regulatory approval by a national medicines agency, with a long clinical-use record — but it does not carry the trial-data depth that an FDA NDA approval represents, and Western independent replication of the efficacy claims is sparse.
Cerebrolysin is a porcine-brain-derived peptide preparation manufactured by Ever Neuro Pharma in Austria. It is registered in many countries (most of the EU, Russia, China, India, South Korea, several Latin American jurisdictions) for stroke recovery, traumatic brain injury, and dementia indications. It is not FDA-approved.
Dihexa is an angiotensin-IV analog developed at Joseph Harding's laboratory at Washington State University. It has a strong preclinical literature on synaptogenesis but no human clinical trials of any indication.
Cerebrolysin is the compound in this category with the largest published clinical-trial dataset and the clearest regulatory footprint outside the US. It is also the compound where the gap between the multiple non-Cochrane systematic reviews (which tend to be cautiously positive) and the Cochrane reviews (which have been largely negative on hard outcomes) is most striking.
The Cochrane review of Cerebrolysin for acute ischaemic stroke was updated in 2020 and again in 2023 [1][2]. Both editions concluded that Cerebrolysin produces no significant effect on mortality or disability when used to treat acute ischemic stroke. The 2019 Cochrane review of Cerebrolysin for vascular dementia reached a similar conclusion on hard cognitive outcomes [3]. These are the highest-quality evidence syntheses in the literature for the largest two indication categories the compound is used for.
Non-Cochrane systematic reviews and meta-analyses have tended to be more positive. A 2023 Brain Sciences meta-analysis on traumatic brain injury reported beneficial signal on some functional-outcome measures [4]; the 2023 Journal of Clinical Medicine systematic review of subarachnoid hemorrhage outcomes likewise [5]. A 2025 CNS Drugs neuroprotection-after-TBI update is the cleanest contemporary survey of the broader literature [6]; the 2021 Neurological Sciences review covers stroke, neurodegeneration, and TBI together [7]. A 2023 Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology RCT reported benefit for post-COVID olfactory, gustatory, and trigeminal chemosensory dysfunctions specifically [8].
The honest editorial read: the mechanism (a mixed neuropeptide preparation with neurotrophic-like effects) is biologically plausible, the regulatory acceptance outside the US is real and decades-deep, and the highest-quality evidence syntheses do not yet support a confident "Cerebrolysin improves hard cognitive outcomes" conclusion. A patient considering Cerebrolysin should weigh that.
Selank and Semax are both developed by Russian academic groups, both registered with the Russian Ministry of Health, both in continuous clinical use in Russia for several decades, and both essentially absent from contemporary Western peer-reviewed RCT literature. The Russian-language publication record is substantial — but Russian-language pharmaceutical-trial methodology and reporting standards differ from FDA-track Western trial standards, and very little of that literature has been translated into Western peer-reviewed publication.
The mechanism stories are biologically plausible. Selank's anxiolytic effect is hypothesized to operate through modulation of GABA-ergic and serotonergic systems and through immunomodulation related to its tuftsin origin. Semax's neuroprotective and cognitive-enhancing effects are hypothesized to operate through modulation of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and several monoamine pathways. Both compounds are administered intranasally in their Russian clinical use, which gives a CNS-delivery rationale that injectable peripheral administration would not.
What this means in practice for a US patient. The "Russian medical tradition" framing is real — these are not back-of-the-shelf research compounds; they are nationally registered drugs in a major country with substantial clinical-use history. But the Western trial-data depth required for confident efficacy and safety claims is not there. We treat them as research-stage from a US clinical-evidence standpoint. The 2025 Neuropeptides review on bioactive peptides modulating neuropathological pathways is the cleanest recent contemporary overview of the broader field [11].
Dihexa (N-hexanoic-Tyr-Ile-(6)-amino hexanoic amide) is an angiotensin-IV analog developed by Joseph Harding's lab at Washington State University. The preclinical case for it is genuinely interesting: in rat models, dihexa produces measurable synaptogenesis (formation of new synaptic connections) at doses several orders of magnitude lower than the parent angiotensin IV. The 2018 Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews systematic review of angiotensin IV and angiotensin-(1-7) cognitive effects covers the preclinical literature [9].
There are no human clinical trials of dihexa. The compound is sold by research-chemical suppliers; it is not in any commercial pharmaceutical pipeline as of mid-2026. Use in humans is entirely off-label and unsupported by clinical-trial evidence.
Two things a reader considering this category should keep in mind.
Counterfeit and quality risk is elevated. A 2020 Drug Testing and Analysis paper examined seized pharmaceutical preparations marketed as cognitive-enhancing peptides and documented quality, identity, and potency problems [10]. The category is small, the supply chain is largely outside FDA-supervised compounding, and the proportion of products purchased through international gray-market channels is higher than in the more established peptide categories. Buyer-beware applies to a higher degree than for, say, compounded GLP-1s sold through licensed US compounding pharmacies.
The Russian-tradition evidence base is not directly portable. Selank and Semax have decades of clinical use in Russia. That is meaningful — it is not "no evidence." But Russian-language trial reporting standards, sample sizes, blinding methodology, and outcome-measure conventions are different from FDA-track Western trials. Importing a Russian-registered drug into a US off-label use case does not import the regulatory and evidentiary architecture that supports its use in Russia.
Cognitive-category peptides are not foregrounded by the major US telehealth platforms in our provider review set. Some platforms with broader peptide menus (notably TeleZenMD) carry methylene blue and adjacent compounds under "brain health" framing; methylene blue is a separate substance from the four compounds covered here and has its own evidence base (modest, primarily for treatment-resistant depression in early-phase trials) that we cover in our TeleZenMD review.
For Cerebrolysin specifically, the practical question for US patients is sourcing. The compound is not legally available through US pharmacy channels; patients who use it typically obtain it from international pharmacies. The legal status of personal importation of unapproved drugs is narrow and case-specific; we do not provide importation guidance.
The Cochrane reviews [1][2] concluded it does not produce significant effects on mortality or disability in acute ischemic stroke. Non-Cochrane meta-analyses have been more cautiously positive on some functional measures [4][7]. The mechanism is biologically plausible. The highest-quality evidence syntheses do not yet support a confident "yes."
The Russian clinical-use record is decades-long, the registration is real, and serious adverse events appear to be uncommon in the Russian literature. Western trial-data safety depth is sparse. Counterfeit risk in the US gray-market channel is real [10].
No. It is not approved by any regulatory agency anywhere and exists only as a research compound. Sales channels are research-chemical suppliers, not pharmacies.
No. Methylene blue is a small-molecule dye and metabolic stimulator with a different mechanism and a different evidence base. It is sometimes marketed alongside cognitive peptides — see our TeleZenMD review for editorial context on how it is positioned commercially. Out of scope for this peptide category.
Commercial reasons primarily. The compounds are off-patent or out-of-jurisdiction-patent, the indication populations are heterogeneous, the regulatory pathway costs are substantial, and the existing Russian or eastern-European registration does not transfer to FDA recognition. Cerebrolysin's manufacturer (Ever Neuro Pharma) has not pursued a US approval pathway despite the compound's broad international footprint.
Editorial note: Informational only — not medical advice. Decisions about cognitive-category peptide use should be made with a clinician familiar with the relevant literature and with the patient's specific neurological or psychiatric context. Last reviewed June 2026.