Whitepill All guides
Compound check · Peptide-style compounds

MK-677: more trials than any unapproved compound here, and FDA still flags it

Read 30 October 2026, every figure sourced and dated. MK-677 has more trial-typed papers than any other unapproved compound in our table, and FDA still lists it in Category 2 for a potential heart-failure risk. More trials is not safer. We cover status, evidence and harms, and nothing about dosing or where to buy.

Figures read
30 October 2026, from the primary source
Next review
30 November 2026
Compiled and checked by
Whitepill editorial desk
Published
30 October 2026

Whitepill finding

As of 30 October 2026, PubMed types 16 MK-677 papers as clinical trials, more than any other unapproved compound we track, yet FDA's page, current to 22 April 2026, lists ibutamoren mesylate in Category 2 for a potential congestive heart failure risk. A trial count is depth, not safety.

From PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov queries run 30 October 2026, and FDA's own page read the same day.

The short version

Regulatory statusUnapprovedFDA lists ibutamoren mesylate in Category 2 for both 503A and 503B (page current as of 22 April 2026); no dispute is on record.
Human trialsModerate record16 of 64 PubMed papers are typed as a clinical or randomized trial.
MK-677: claims against the recordwhat gets said, and what the record shows, read 30 October 2026

What is MK-677's status with the FDA right now?

FDA's page on bulk drug substances that may present significant safety risks (content current as of 22 April 2026) lists ibutamoren mesylate in Category 2 for both compounding policies: added for 503B on 29 December 2022 and for 503A on 29 September 2023. Nothing on that page approves it.

FDA's stated reason, in our paraphrase: it poses significant safety risks because of a potential for congestive heart failure in certain patients, and the agency points to a randomized, placebo-controlled trial in people recovering from hip fracture that was stopped early over a heart failure safety signal. Our own walk through what the categories mean is in how FDA's peptide categories work.

Ibutamoren mesylate and the FDAdates from FDA's own table
Ibutamoren mesylate FDA Category 2 timeline. 2022-12-29: 29 Dec 2022, 503B: Category 2. 2023-09-29: 29 Sep 2023, 503A: Category 2. 2026-04-22: 22 Apr 2026, FDA page current to. 2026-10-30: 30 Oct 2026, This page read202320242025202629 Dec 2022503B: Category 229 Sep 2023503A: Category 222 Apr 2026FDA page current to30 Oct 2026This page read
Every point is from FDA's table row for ibutamoren mesylate, read on 30 October 2026. A Category 2 listing sits on FDA's list of substances with identified safety risks; it is not an approval.

FDA's table names the substance only as ibutamoren mesylate. The 2008 Neurology abstract on PubMed states the equivalence itself, calling it "MK-677 (ibutamoren mesylate)", and the 2011 paper's title uses "MK-0677 (ibutamoren mesylate)".

How much human evidence is there?

A PubMed search on MK-677 and ibutamoren returns 64 papers. 45 carry PubMed's loose "humans" tag, which is not the same as a human trial.

16 are tagged as a clinical trial or randomized trial, and 4 are tagged as case reports. ClinicalTrials.gov lists 8 interventional studies matching the names; we have not assessed their design or results.

Papers typed as clinical trials or randomized trials on PubMed, 30 October 2026. MK-677: 16. Melanotan II: 4. Selank: 3. BPC-157: 0. Bremelanotide: 16. Semaglutide: 344MK-67716Melanotan II4Selank3BPC-1570Bremelanotide16Semaglutide344
PubMed papers whose publication type is "Randomized Controlled Trial" or "Clinical Trial", from a published query for each name, read 30 October 2026. Dark bars are drugs FDA has approved for some use (bremelanotide, semaglutide). The highlighted bar is FDA Category 2. These are tagged trial papers, a count of depth of record, not of effect or quality or safety.

For scale, the next deepest unapproved compound in our table is Melanotan II with 4 trial-typed papers, BPC-157 has 0 (see our BPC-157 check), and semaglutide, a blockbuster approved drug used for scale only, has 344. So MK-677 has the deepest record of its kind here, and it is still in Category 2. That is the point of this page: a long trial list and a safety listing sit side by side.

What do the randomized trials say about who was studied?

We opened two abstracts at PubMed and state only their design and population. Here they are side by side.

The two trials we openedsame fields, read across, read 30 October 2026

2011, Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics

Stopped early
Who
123 elderly patients admitted for hip fracture: 62 on ibutamoren mesylate, 61 on placebo
Design
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled; registered as NCT00128115, phase 2, status terminated
Main outcomes
Change in functional performance measures and in blood IGF-1
What happened
Terminated early over a congestive heart failure safety signal; the authors called the safety profile unfavorable in that population

PubMed DOI Registry record

2008, Neurology

No safety read
Who
563 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease
Design
Double-blind, multicenter, randomized, 12 months against placebo
Main outcomes
Change from baseline on four clinical rating scales; 416 patients completed the 12 months
What happened
The abstract we read did not report adverse events, so we draw no safety conclusion from it

PubMed Publisher page (secondary copy)

Both groups are older patients with a disease or injury. Neither describes healthy young adults, and neither tells you what happens in anyone outside its own population.

Why a deep trial record can still end in a safety listing: Trials run (16 typed papers), then One trial stopped (safety signal, 2011 paper), then FDA reads it (heart failure concern), then Category 2 (both 503A and 503B)Trials run16 typed papersOne trial stoppedsafety signal, 2011 paperFDA reads itheart failure concernCategory 2both 503A and 503B
The sequence is as FDA's table and the 2011 abstract describe it. A trial record is where safety signals get found, which is the opposite of what a bigger count is often taken to mean.

What harms are on the record?

The trial populations were older, ill patients, and the record cannot tell us how much risk differs for other groups. If you or someone you know has had a bad reaction to any product, report it to FDA MedWatch.

Before you trust a trial count
1. A count of tagged trial papers is depth of record, not effect, quality or safety.
2. Open the trial and read why it stopped, if it did.
3. Check the regulator's own page, and the date on it.
4. Ask who the participants were. Results in one group do not transfer to another.
5. Take what you read to a licensed clinician, and report any adverse event to FDA MedWatch.

Where does this sit on the evidence ladder?

Trial depth is only one rung. The evidence ladder sets randomized-trial counts for ordinary topics beside attention. MK-677's 16 is deeper than most compounds the scene discusses, but a rung is not a verdict: depth of record tells you that studies were run, and these studies are where the heart-failure signal came from.

What should you do with this?

How these figures were read

Method

PubMed counts come from the published query shown on each linked search (title and abstract terms for the names, plus a publication-type filter where stated), read 30 October 2026; they move as papers are indexed, and the "humans" tag is a loose label.

ClinicalTrials.gov counts are interventional studies matching the same terms, read the same day. The FDA row was read from FDA's page on 30 October 2026, and the two abstracts were opened at PubMed the same day; we state only what each abstract says about design and population.

We found no test data from any tester for MK-677, so this page has no quality grade. Nothing here is medical advice, and the page contains no dosing, protocol or sourcing information by design.

FAQ

Is MK-677 approved by the FDA?

Nothing on FDA's own bulk-substances page approves it. As of that page's content date of 22 April 2026, FDA lists ibutamoren mesylate, the name behind MK-677, in Category 2 for both 503A and 503B compounding, citing a potential for congestive heart failure in certain patients. We read the page on 30 October 2026.

Why is MK-677 in FDA Category 2?

FDA says it poses significant safety risks because of a potential for congestive heart failure in certain patients, and notes a randomized placebo-controlled trial in people recovering from hip fracture that was stopped early over that signal.

Does having many trials mean MK-677 is safe?

No. PubMed has 16 trial-typed papers on it, the most of any unapproved compound in our table, and FDA still lists it in Category 2. A trial count is depth of record (tagged trial papers, not effect or quality). Trials are also where safety signals get found.

How many human studies exist?

As of 30 October 2026, PubMed has 64 papers, 45 tagged human, 16 typed as clinical or randomized trials and 4 as case reports, and ClinicalTrials.gov lists 8 interventional studies. We have not assessed every study's quality.

Who was studied in the trials?

In the two abstracts we read, the participants were 123 elderly hip-fracture patients (2011) and 563 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease (2008). Neither tells you about healthy people.

Where do I report a bad reaction?

To FDA MedWatch, FDA's adverse event reporting program, and tell a licensed clinician. Reports are how a safety record gets built.

Bottom line

MK-677 has 16 trial-typed papers, the deepest record of any unapproved compound in our table, and FDA lists it in Category 2 over a potential for congestive heart failure after a trial was stopped early. More trials is not safer. Nothing here is medical advice; take it to a licensed clinician.

Related on Whitepill

Compound checkBPC-157: status, trials and harmsThe opposite case: an empty trial record and a status that moved in 2026.EvidenceThe evidence ladderRandomized-trial depth for training, creatine, sunscreen and more, side by side.HubCompoundsEvery compound check, with status, trials and harms.