Immune coordination
Thymosin alpha-1 is studied across both innate and adaptive immune signalling rather than as a one-directional stimulant.
Explore the research →IMMUNE-MODULATION RESEARCH
Thymosin Alpha-1
An immune-focused peptide studied for how it may influence the body's response to infection and illness, with evidence that varies by clinical setting.
Immune coordinationViral-hepatitis trialsSepsis research
Credible human research—with condition-specific outcomesThymosin alpha-1 has progressed from immune biology into randomized human trials. An older hepatitis-B trial reported a positive virological signal; the large 2025 TESTS sepsis trial did not reduce mortality.
FOLLOW THE FULL PICTUREFrom interest to evidence, quality and the numbers.
Why are people interested in thymosin alpha-1?
Thymosin alpha-1 attracts interest because it may help the immune system coordinate its response rather than simply pushing it harder. Its links with T-cell function, infection response and immune recovery have led to decades of human research across several areas of illness.
Critical illness
Sepsis became a major target because severe infection can involve both damaging inflammation and impaired immune responsiveness.
Explore the research →Viral-hepatitis research
Older randomized trials explored thymalfasin as an immune-directed approach in chronic hepatitis B.
Explore the research →Immune recovery
Interest includes restoring more coordinated responses after immune suppression, infection or severe physiological stress.
Explore the research →THE SCIENCE BIT
Helping coordinate an immune response.
Thymosin alpha-1 is a short peptide studied for effects on immune-cell communication. Laboratory work explores antigen-presenting cells, T-cell responses and innate-immune signalling.
This is a network of interactions, rather than a simple 'boost immunity' switch. Human outcomes depend on the illness and study: a plausible immune mechanism does not guarantee that every patient benefits.
See the studies & trials →- Antigen presentation
- Helping cells recognise threats
- T cells
- Adaptive immune responses
- Innate signals
- Early immune coordination
How this connects to the research
Mechanistic evidence and mixed, condition-specific human trial results.
FROM MOLECULE TO TISSUE
Where Thymosin Alpha-1 connects with the body
These are the tissues and biological systems behind the interest in Thymosin Alpha-1.
- Immune cells
- Recognition and communication.
- Lymphoid tissues
- T-cell activity.
- Inflammatory environments
- Condition-specific research.
The research behind the interest
Immune coordination
Thymosin alpha-1 is studied across both innate and adaptive immune signalling rather than as a one-directional stimulant.
Mechanistic research examines dendritic-cell, Toll-like-receptor and T-cell pathways that may influence how the immune system recognises and responds to challenge.
Human + mechanistic evidenceExplore the studies →Critical illness
Researchers have also explored Thymosin Alpha-1 in people who are seriously unwell, particularly where immune function becomes disrupted or suppressed.
The 2013 ETASS trial reported encouraging immune-marker and survival signals; the larger 2025 TESTS phase-3 trial did not reduce 28-day mortality.
Strong human evidence · mixed efficacyExplore the studies →Viral-hepatitis research
Older randomized trials explored thymalfasin as an immune-directed approach in chronic hepatitis B.
A 1998 controlled trial reported a higher complete virological response after a 26-week course, although modern antiviral treatment has changed the clinical landscape.
Positive older human trialExplore the studies →Immune recovery
Interest includes restoring more coordinated responses after immune suppression, infection or severe physiological stress.
Trials can show changes in immune markers, but those biological signals only become clinically useful when they also improve patient-important outcomes.
Developing, condition-specific evidenceExplore the studies →Studies & trials
Studies & trials
Original publication · PubMed · trial registry where availableEfficacy of thymosin alpha-1 in chronic hepatitis B ↗
98 people with chronic hepatitis B assigned to 26 weeks, 52 weeks or untreated control
Subcutaneous1.6 mg twice weekly26 or 52 weeks; 18-month assessment
Complete virological response at 18 months was 40.6% after the 26-week course versus 9.4% in controls (P=.004).
The 52-week group reached 26.5%; no significant side effects were observed in this older treatment-era trial.
Thymosin alpha-1 for severe sepsis (ETASS) ↗
361 adults with severe sepsis across six intensive-care centres
SubcutaneousTwice daily for 5 days, then once daily for 2 days7-day treatment; 28-day primary outcome
28-day mortality was 26.0% with thymosin alpha-1 versus 35.0% with control, but the primary non-stratified comparison was not conventionally significant (P=.062).
mHLA-DR immune-marker recovery improved; no thymosin-alpha-1-related serious adverse event was reported.
Thymosin alpha-1 for COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysis ↗
Hospitalized adults studied during COVID-19 across heterogeneous clinical reports
The review pooled a developing literature around mortality and immune outcomes.
Variation in study design, disease severity and background care limits certainty; it does not establish a general antiviral or wellness effect.
The efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS) ↗
1,106 adults with sepsis across 22 centres
SubcutaneousEvery 12 hours7 days; 28-day primary outcome
28-day mortality was 23.4% with thymosin alpha-1 versus 24.1% with placebo (hazard ratio 0.99; P=.93).
No secondary or safety outcome differed significantly, providing the clearest current boundary on broad sepsis efficacy.
Evidence snapshot
Evidence snapshot
Separate dimensions, not one overall score◎
Human evidenceStrong
4/5 evidence depth
Randomized human trials span chronic hepatitis B and sepsis, including a 1,106-participant phase-3 study.
✓
Clinical efficacyDeveloping
3/5 evidence depth
Positive signals in older hepatitis-B and sepsis research did not translate into a mortality benefit in the larger 2025 TESTS trial.
◇
Safety evidenceDeveloping
3/5 evidence depth
Controlled trials provide meaningful short-course tolerability data; long-term, off-label and unregulated use remain less certain.
⌁
Preclinical evidenceStrong
4/5 evidence depth
Dendritic-cell, T-cell and pattern-recognition research provides a broad mechanistic foundation.
HOW TO READ THESE SCORESStrong preclinical evidence · strong human evidence
These are editorial evidence-depth ratings on a 1–5 scale, not a statistical result or a single scientific formula. They summarise how much relevant evidence is present in each separate category and how mature that evidence is.
Human evidenceHow much direct research in people is available and how developed it is.
Clinical efficacyWhether human studies demonstrate meaningful outcomes for the claims being discussed.
Safety evidenceHow much human safety, tolerability and longer-term follow-up information is available.
Preclinical evidenceThe depth of laboratory and animal research supporting biological plausibility.
EVIDENCE OVER TIME
A real human research programme—not one simple answer
The strongest way to read this evidence is as a progression: an older positive hepatitis-B signal, an encouraging but borderline sepsis trial, then a much larger neutral phase-3 sepsis result.
Randomized trial; clearer virological response after a 26-week course.
Immune-marker and survival signals, with a borderline primary comparison.
1,106 participants; no reduction in 28-day mortality.
From promising signals to human evidencePreclinical research can reveal promising biological signals. Human studies show how far those signals have translated into real-world outcomes.
What people are exploring
COMMUNITY · USE CASES & EXPERIENCE
What people want to change with Thymosin Alpha-1
People explore thymosin alpha-1 because its immune biology is credible and its human research history is deeper than that of many experimental peptides. The opportunity is condition-specific immune coordination; the boundary is that positive biology has not produced a universal clinical benefit.
Explore the everyday goalsConceptual scientific illustration
THE PRACTICAL ATTRACTION
The goals behind the interest
What the desired change means in daily life, and what makes an experience useful to understand.
Resilience when infections interrupt life
Immune interest often means fewer disruptive illnesses or recovering more fully after one. The desired outcome is practical resilience, although immune activity is not a single score that can simply be turned up.
- What makes a report informative
- A clear illness history and meaningful clinical outcomes.
- What can muddy the picture
- Exposure, vaccination, season and spontaneous recovery affect infection patterns.
Recovery after a prolonged illness
People interested in lingering fatigue or feeling run down hope to regain ordinary capacity. This motivation is understandable, but trials in severe acute infection do not directly answer post-viral fatigue questions.
- What makes a report informative
- Daily function and the duration of symptoms.
- What can muddy the picture
- Post-illness recovery and concurrent treatments make attribution difficult.
Support alongside specialist treatment
Hepatitis and severe-infection research attracts interest in adjunctive immune treatment. The context matters: a hospital or disease-specific regimen is different from general wellness use.
- What makes a report informative
- The diagnosis, background treatment and exact studied outcome.
- What can muddy the picture
- Condition-specific adjunctive findings do not establish routine immune-boosting benefit.
PUT THE EXPERIENCE IN CONTEXT
How the goals compare with the research
Open an area to distinguish human findings from laboratory explanations.
Immune resilience
Often described as an immune 'balancer' for periods of increased exposure, stress or perceived low resilience.
Human findings & limits
Human trials confirm pharmacological exposure and sometimes show immune-marker changes, but there is no controlled general-wellness endpoint.
Laboratory & animal context
Dendritic-cell, Toll-like-receptor and T-cell findings make the core immune-modulation idea biologically credible.
What this means: A plausible research theme that still needs a direct trial in the population and outcome people actually mean.
Recovery after severe infection
Sepsis and post-hospital immune dysfunction drive hopes for more coordinated recovery.
Human findings & limits
ETASS was encouraging but statistically borderline; the much larger TESTS phase-3 trial found no 28-day mortality benefit.
Laboratory & animal context
Immune-restoration mechanisms remain relevant, but the definitive broad sepsis outcome was neutral.
What this means: Subgroup or biomarker-guided research may continue, but broad mortality benefit is not established.
Viral-hepatitis and antiviral adjunct interest
Older hepatitis-B trials remain one of the clearest positive human signals for thymalfasin.
Human findings & limits
The 1998 randomized trial reported a higher complete virological response after a 26-week course than untreated control.
Laboratory & animal context
Immune recognition and T-cell pathways provide context, while modern antiviral care changes how the historical result should be used.
What this means: Meaningful older human evidence—not a substitute for current antiviral standards or proof across viral illnesses.
Long illness, fatigue and post-viral symptoms
Communities extend immune-recovery language into fatigue, long illness and post-viral symptom discussions.
Human findings & limits
Robust randomized trials for broad fatigue, long-COVID or wellness outcomes are not established on this profile.
Laboratory & animal context
Immune pathways offer a hypothesis, but cannot show that nonspecific symptoms will improve.
What this means: A patient-important question that needs direct symptom and function trials, not extrapolation from sepsis or hepatitis.
Dose & duration
DOSE & DURATION
Research protocols · community patterns · calculator toolsSee the numbers in their proper context
See the amount, how often it was used and how long each study ran. Published human research and community descriptions each carry their own source label, so you can see where the numbers came from.
Source matters. The figures below show authorised, human-research or community-described protocols in their original context — not a personalised recommendation.
ONE ANECDOTAL COMMUNITY EXAMPLE
ANECDOTAL · UNVALIDATEDA fixed twice-weekly pattern—separate from hospital trial dosing
This visual shows a recurring community pattern that borrows the 1.6 mg amount used in older clinical research. It has not been validated for general immune resilience, fatigue or wellness.
1Weeks 1–2
1.6 mg · twice weeklyAnecdotal starting pattern
2Weeks 3–4
Same amount / spacingNo validated titration step
3Weeks 5–8
Continue or stopCommunity cycle lengths vary
4After cycle
Pause & reviewNo evidence-based break interval
What people discuss1.6 mg twice weekly for four-to-eight weeks, followed by a pause, is a recurring anecdotal pattern. It is shown to explain the conversation—not to prescribe it.
What trials actually testedHepatitis-B research used twice-weekly treatment for 26 or 52 weeks. Sepsis trials used much more frequent seven-day hospital protocols. Those disease-specific schedules are not interchangeable.
WHY 1.6 MG APPEARS SO OFTEN
Hepatitis-B randomized trial · 1998 ↗It is the unit amount used in multiple thymalfasin trials. Reusing a number does not reproduce the population, diagnosis, monitoring or benefit observed in the source study.
Thymalfasin has published human protocols, but their dose and duration belong to specific diseases and treatment eras. They do not establish a general immune-support regimen.
PUBLISHED HUMAN RESEARCH
View source ↗Chronic hepatitis-B randomized trial ↗
98 people with chronic hepatitis B in an older antiviral-treatment era
WHAT THIS TRIAL EXAMPLE SHOWS
This was a published human study. It involved 98 people with chronic hepatitis B in an older antiviral-treatment era. Route: Injection under the skin (SubQ). The study lasted 26 or 52 weeks. The figures below describe the research design, not a personal schedule.
| First amount studied | 1.6 mg |
|---|---|
| How often? | twice a week |
| How was it given? | Injection under the skin (SubQ) |
| How long? | 26 or 52 weeks |
See the exact study wording +
Start / initial: 1.6 mg
End / target: 1.6 mg
Frequency: Twice weekly
Route: Subcutaneous
Study duration: 26 or 52 weeks
Source: Chien et al., Hepatology 1998 ↗
The 26-week arm showed the clearer virological signal. This historical disease-specific protocol is not a general wellness schedule and should not replace current hepatitis-B care.
PUBLISHED HUMAN RESEARCH
View source ↗ETASS severe-sepsis trial ↗
361 adults receiving intensive care for severe sepsis
WHAT THIS TRIAL EXAMPLE SHOWS
This was a published human study. It involved 361 adults receiving intensive care for severe sepsis. Route: Injection under the skin (SubQ). The study lasted 7 days. The figures below describe the research design, not a personal schedule.
| First amount studied | 1.6 mg twice daily |
|---|---|
| Later or target amount | 1.6 mg once daily |
| How often? | Twice daily for 5 days, then once daily for 2 days |
| How was it given? | Injection under the skin (SubQ) |
| How long? | 7 days |
See the exact study wording +
Start / initial: 1.6 mg twice daily
End / target: 1.6 mg once daily
Frequency: Twice daily for 5 days, then once daily for 2 days
Route: Subcutaneous
Study duration: 7 days
Source: Wu et al., Critical Care 2013 ↗
A protocol-led step-down in an intensive-care trial—not a community titration model. The primary 28-day comparison was statistically borderline and the later phase-3 result was neutral.
PUBLISHED HUMAN RESEARCH
View source ↗TESTS phase-3 sepsis trial ↗
1,106 adults with sepsis treated at 22 centres
WHAT THIS TRIAL EXAMPLE SHOWS
This was a published human study. It involved 1,106 adults with sepsis treated at 22 centres. Route: Injection under the skin (SubQ). The study lasted 7 days. The figures below describe the research design, not a personal schedule.
| First amount studied | 1.6 mg |
|---|---|
| How often? | Every 12 hours |
| How was it given? | Injection under the skin (SubQ) |
| How long? | 7 days |
See the exact study wording +
Start / initial: 1.6 mg
End / target: 1.6 mg
Frequency: Every 12 hours
Route: Subcutaneous
Study duration: 7 days
Fixed short-course hospital protocol. It did not reduce 28-day mortality and should not be converted into a routine immune-support schedule.
COMMUNITY DISCUSSION
Anecdotal / unvalidated · borrows a clinical amountWhat people commonly discuss
STARTING APPROACHES
A recurring community pattern borrows the older 1.6 mg clinical amount and uses it twice weekly rather than the intensive-care schedules.
DURATION / CYCLES
Four-to-eight-week cycles are commonly discussed for broad immune-resilience goals, but this duration has not been validated in a general wellness trial.
MAINTENANCE DISCUSSION
People discuss a pause and reassessment after a cycle; no evidence-based maintenance or break interval has been established.
Community patterns are anecdotal and unvalidated unless a linked human study independently supports the same approach.
COMMUNITY-REPORTED PRACTICEInjection patterns people commonly discussPopular uses · route · site discussion · timing · durationMixed anecdotal consensus
Immune resiliencePost-illness recoverySeasonal immune supportLong-illness discussion
ROUTE PEOPLE DISCUSS
Subcutaneous injection is the route used in clinical trials and most often discussed online.
INJECTION-SITE DISCUSSION
General subcutaneous sites are discussed; there is no evidence that a particular site changes immune outcomes.
TIMING PEOPLE DISCUSS
Twice-weekly spacing is often discussed outside clinical care, without comparative timing evidence.
DURATION / CYCLE DISCUSSION
Four-to-eight-week cycles followed by a pause are a recurring anecdotal pattern rather than a tested wellness protocol.
What the evidence supports
Published trials establish condition-specific protocols, not a general dose, cycle length, maintenance plan or benefit for broad immune resilience.
Community reports describe what people say they do; they are not instructions, validated protocols, or evidence that a particular injection site or timing improves outcomes.CALCULATOR TOOLS
Work with the numbers
Convert amounts, concentration, liquid volume and vial requirements. These tools do the arithmetic; they do not select a dose.
NEED HELP READING THE NUMBERS?Source labels, routes and dose termsOpen guide +
HOW WE LABEL NUMBERSKnow where a dose came from before you compare it.
Authorised labelHuman trialCommunity-describedBEFORE THE NUMBERS: CHECK THE PRODUCT
Understand peptide testing →A dose only means something if the vial contains what the label says.
Purity, identity, quantity, sterility and endotoxin testing answer different questions. Learn how to read a COA and why a high purity percentage is not the same as confirming the amount in the vial.
READ THIS PAGE IN THREE STEPS
Understand the study before the number
A dose only makes sense alongside the population, route, frequency and duration. Start with where the number came from, then look at how it was delivered and how long the study actually ran.
1Source
Was it an authorised label, a human trial or a community-described pattern?
2Route & frequency
How was it given, and how often? The same number by a different route may not mean the same exposure.
3Duration
Was this one dose, a short trial or long-term treatment? A study window is not automatically a recommended cycle.
ROUTES EXPLAINED
Plain-English guideWhat do the injection types mean?
Route means how a compound was delivered. It affects absorption and can completely change how a study should be interpreted.
SubQ / SCSubcutaneous
An injection into the fatty layer just under the skin.
Common in peptide and metabolic-drug studies. It usually aims for systemic absorption rather than treating only the spot injected.IMIntramuscular
An injection into muscle tissue.
Muscle can absorb a medicine differently from fat. An IM amount should not be assumed to be equivalent to a SubQ amount.IVIntravenous
Delivered directly into a vein.
This gives immediate bloodstream exposure and is commonly used in supervised research or clinical settings. It is not interchangeable with a home injection route.INIntranasal
Delivered through the nose rather than by injection.
The amount delivered depends on formulation and device. A spray count alone does not tell you the dose unless concentration and spray volume are known.Other routes you may see:Oral = swallowed.Topical = applied to skin or another surface.Implant = a formulation placed under the skin by a trained professional.
CALENDAR SETUP
Daily editorial example
Community example · not clinically validatedThis daily community description differs from human hepatitis B research using 1.6 mg twice weekly. That trial does not validate these daily amounts, increases or an eight-week course.
Form and route: Injection under the skin, as described in the example
| Calendar stage | Amount each time |
|---|---|
| Weeks 1–1 | 0.3 mg |
| Weeks 2–8 | 0.5 mg |
Frequency: Every day · 1 entry per scheduled day.
This is a finite editorial example. Its ending does not establish a safe course, break or repeat cycle. No repeat is added automatically.
PLAIN-ENGLISH GLOSSARYWhat do the dose terms mean?Open glossary +
mgmilligram
One thousand micrograms (mcg).
mcg / μgmicrogram
One thousandth of a milligram.
mcg/kgweight-based dose
The amount is calculated for each kilogram of body weight.
IUinternational unit
A measure of biological activity used for some medicines; it cannot be converted to mg without compound-specific information.
Routehow it was given
For example SubQ, IM, IV, intranasal, oral or topical.
Frequencyhow often
For example once daily, twice weekly or every seven days.
Titrationplanned step-up or step-down
A protocol changes the amount over time rather than using one fixed amount throughout.
Half-lifehow quickly levels fall
The time taken for the amount of a compound in the body to reduce by roughly half. It can influence study timing but does not by itself define a schedule.
Cyclea defined period of use
Usually means an on-period followed by a stop or review. Many community 'cycles' have not been clinically validated.
Maintenancea continuing phase
A longer-term amount or interval used after an initial phase when a study or authorised treatment actually defines one.
Reconstitutionturning powder into solution
Adding a specified liquid to a freeze-dried vial so a concentration can be calculated.
U-100 unitssyringe volume markings
100 units equals 1 mL on a U-100 insulin syringe. The markings show volume, not peptide mass.
Often combined with
OFTEN COMBINED WITH
Community rationale · component roles · evidence boundaryWhy people explore pairings with Thymosin Alpha-1
See the thinking behind community-named stacks, the different role each component is proposed to play, and how much of that idea has actually been tested as a combination.
Potential first, evidence in context. Pairings are usually explored because their research stories appear complementary. That makes them interesting to study, but does not yet prove extra benefit or safety.
CURRENT COMPOUNDThymosin Alpha-1
→
OFTEN EXPLORED WITHThymosin alpha-1 + condition-specific care
Thymosin alpha-1 + Standard treatment
→
OFTEN EXPLORED WITHThymosin alpha-1 + vaccination
Thymosin alpha-1 + Vaccination
→
OFTEN EXPLORED WITHThymosin alpha-1 + LL-37
Thymosin alpha-1 + LL-37
Combination-specific human research is the strongest evidence for what a pairing adds. Evidence for either ingredient alone should not be silently transferred to the combination.
TTHYMOSIN ALPHA-1 IS USUALLY DISCUSSED AROUNDImmune recognition, coordination and recovery
＋Its strongest rationale combines dendritic-cell, T-cell and condition-specific human research rather than a generic “boost”.
PTHE PAIRED APPROACH MAY ADDStandard treatment, vaccine response or host-defence biology
These are very different pairings. Only direct combination studies can show whether either component changes the other's benefit or risk.
＋
OFTEN EXPLORED WITH
Explore →＋Thymosin alpha-1 + condition-specific care
Thymosin alpha-1 + Standard treatmentWHY IT IS EXPLOREDClinical research has mainly tested thymalfasin as an adjunct to disease-specific care rather than as a replacement.
This is the best-grounded pairing concept, but the effect still depends on the exact disease and trial.OFTEN EXPLORED WITH
Explore →＋Thymosin alpha-1 + vaccination
Thymosin alpha-1 + VaccinationWHY IT IS EXPLOREDResearchers have explored whether immune modulation can improve vaccine responses in selected populations.
Population- and vaccine-specific evidence cannot be generalized into routine immune enhancement.OFTEN EXPLORED WITH
Explore →Thymosin alpha-1 + LL-37
Thymosin alpha-1 + LL-37WHY IT IS EXPLOREDCommunity discussions combine immune coordination with a host-defence peptide narrative.
No controlled combination trial establishes added benefit or safety.01Start with the condition
Immune resilience, hepatitis, sepsis and vaccine response are different clinical questions.
02Keep adjuncts as adjuncts
The human research adds thymalfasin to standard care; it does not support replacing proven treatment.
03Look for direct combination data
Separate evidence for two ingredients cannot establish synergy, interaction safety or the best schedule.
Safety context
SAFETY & UNCERTAINTY
Human trial exposure is reassuring—but context still matters
01ENCOURAGING CONTEXTRandomized trials provide meaningful human exposure data
The 2013 ETASS study reported no thymosin-alpha-1-related serious adverse event, and the larger TESTS trial found no significant safety difference.
02WHY CONTEXT MATTERSImmune activity is not universally desirable
Autoimmune disease, transplantation, cancer and concurrent immune therapies can change the benefit-risk question substantially.
03WHAT REMAINS UNCERTAINLong-term wellness use and unregulated products
Trial tolerability cannot establish indefinite off-label safety, product identity, sterility or dose accuracy outside regulated care.
What the current evidence saysShort-course trials did not identify a major safety imbalance, and the 1998 hepatitis-B trial reported no significant side effects. However, an immune-active compound may have different consequences in autoimmunity, transplantation, cancer or alongside other immune therapies. Unregulated product identity, sterility and dose accuracy create additional risks outside clinical research.
01 · OBSERVEDPublished safety findings
The summary above reflects the human or preclinical evidence currently represented on this profile.
02 · UNCERTAINGaps still matter
Limited follow-up, small studies or absent controlled trials can leave uncommon and longer-term risks unresolved.
03 · CONTEXTProduct and regulatory status
Route, product identity, quality and regulatory status can materially change the safety context; see the linked status sources below.
The recent phase-3 sepsis trial found no statistically significant difference in measured safety outcomes.
Evidence from infection research should not be transferred automatically to autoimmunity, cancer or transplantation.
Unregulated sourcing adds uncertainty around identity, purity, sterility, concentration and handling.
Sources & current status
READ FURTHER
Sources & current status
Follow the professional sources used across this profile, then see how the compound is currently described in regulatory and research terms.
KEY RESEARCH RECORD
15 sourcesSources used on this profile
Original publicationEfficacy of thymosin alpha-1 in chronic hepatitis BJournal / DOI ↗Bibliographic recordEfficacy of thymosin alpha-1 in chronic hepatitis BPubMed ↗Original publicationThymosin alpha-1 for severe sepsis (ETASS)Critical Care · full paper ↗Original publicationThymosin alpha-1 for severe sepsis (ETASS)Journal / DOI ↗Trial registryThymosin alpha-1 for severe sepsis (ETASS)ClinicalTrials.gov ↗Original publicationThymosin alpha-1 for COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysisJournal / DOI ↗Bibliographic recordThymosin alpha-1 for COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysisPubMed ↗Original publicationThe efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS)BMJ · full paper ↗Original publicationThe efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS)Free full paper ↗Original publicationThe efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS)Journal / DOI ↗Bibliographic recordThe efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS)PubMed ↗Trial registryThe efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS)ClinicalTrials.gov ↗Official regulatory reviewSafety and uncertaintyFDA compounding review · 2024 ↗Professional sourceUnited KingdomMHRA products database ↗Professional sourceUnited StatesFDA Drugs@FDA database ↗
CURRENT STATUS
How to interpret its position today
No UK-authorised medicine is represented on this profile
Thymosin alpha-1 / thymalfasin is presented as a research compound. The MHRA products database should be checked for any future change in authorised status.
MHRA products database ↗No FDA-approved therapeutic product identified
Regulatory evaluation of a substance for compounding is separate from approval of a drug for safety and efficacy.
FDA Drugs@FDA database ↗Profile reviewed against its linked source record on 20 September 2026. See how evidence is assessed.